Gordon's RANTS
Here you'll find out what I've been thinking about a variety of things,
at a single point in time (i.e. when I wrote the rant).
Warning: strong / confronting views follow.
Click on a topic:
Why I'll never buy a new Harley, Ducati, or Boxer (2015)
4 Wheel Drives (2002) and Teslas (2022)
Why I'll never buy a new Harley, Ducati, or Boxer
(It's all about technology, and value)
Remember, it's just my opinion
(after 40 years of riding).
I'm not trying to flame.
Each to their own.
Some people have too much money.
Some people need to show off.
Some people need to belong.
Harley-Davidson
Harley are very specific in their user profile - They sell "lifestyle cruisers".
In fact H-D riders are extremely parochial about their "lifestyle choice".
But H-D have always been amongst the last to adopt better technologies.
Harley riders have roundly rejected the much more advanced V-Rod.
We saw maybe 5 V-Rods at Sturgis. How come? Simple ...
V-Rod was designed by Porsche. Ha ha ha ha.
US roads are way better suited to H-D's, than Oz roads.
H-D's are still air cooled - not much good in Oz, I'm afraid.
To get two disc brakes up front you have to pay > $30,000.
ABS was around for years before it appeared on ANY Harley.
Dry sump motors, separate gearboxes? What?
For a 50% higher price you get half the pistons / cylinders and no radiator.
You get ~?~ performance, ~?~ handling, and variable reliability.
You know the jokes. Is there value in that? Really?
They enlisted Erik Buell to show H-D's COULD be made to perform.
Then they sacked Buell when they finally realised ...
H-D fanatics are more interested in chrome than riding.
I acknowledge that H-D are the second biggest selling bike in Oz.
And they say you don't buy a Harley, you marry one (for life).
(... Forever working hard at the relationship? Can't sell?)
I suspect most H-D's could well be called "her indoors". (H-I)
I won't be buying one. I'm not a 1%er pretender.
But?
Ah you say, "But you have a Harley clone yourself".
Yes, we have a Gilroy Indian with not a single actual Harley part.
But it didn't cost > $30,000, and has an S&S motor, and actually handles.
And, it's still a single purpose bike for us, not an allrounder.
And, they only made 300 Springfield Scouts.
And, it's on the SEVS register ...
And, and, and, ... it's not really in the same category at all.
It may look similar, and have many compatible parts, but take a closer look ...
Ducati
Ducati on the other hand, take technology into the unreliable realm.
They too, cost 50% more than a better able bike from outside Italy does.
Those lovely V-Twin motors are great, and have value in construction.
But the bikes are unreliable and always have been, I'm sorry to say.
I bought a "poor man's Ducati" a few years back - a Hyosung GT650.
It cost 1/3 less than the equivalent Duc, and had 1/3 more power!
We traded it at 44,000kms for half the purchase price (i.e. we lost little).
It was ALWAYS reliable, and after a stack, cost a pittance to repair.
But then I couldn't be a "Ducati Tragic" (snob) on a bike like that, could I?
Piers had an SV1000. Great motor, reliable, and value. Japanese Ducati.
My brother had a 1976 900SS. It was a stonking high performance bike (then).
The purchase price, maintenance, retrieval costs, and fines, were not worth it.
I don't think anything's changed since. So that must be what Duc' riders want!
BMW Boxers (R Series)
Ah, this'll be fun.
The R1200GS is still the biggest selling bike in Europe. (MT-07 & MT-09 are next.)
Many say it's the best bike ever built, and they MAY be right. I'll grant that.
But like Harley-Davidson you pay 50% more, for half the components.
For goodness sake, they're air-cooled aeroplane engines - were, from the beginning.
The airheads come from Germany, where sitting at lights won't overheat the motor.
Aeroplanes have wings that stick out the side, so that kind of motor makes sense.
But motorbikes don't have wings. Wait a minute, is that why they called it a God Wing?
See below. :-) The basic design in a motorbike is screwy, surely.
BMW are being forced to make oil-heads, and now water-heads. Ha ha.
Aeroplanes don't have side stands either, that cause BMW Boxers to burn settled oil.
BMW itself has been trying to kill off the R Series since the early 1980's. What?
They now sell singles (G), parallel twins (F), transverse 4's (K/S), and scooters (C).
How anyone (under 80) would buy a boxer now, is beyond me.
I'll bet KTM wish they'd sponsored Ewen and Charlie now.
But I'll never pretend I'm Ewen or Charlie. No support lorries following me.
OtOH, I might be tempted to buy any of the other BMW series bikes.
Beemers ARE well made, although I have many friends who've had Beemer issues too.
Now don't get me wrong - I LOVE flat motors.
I've had quite a few Volkswagons and Subarus. I just love 'em ... in cars.
OK, now name me any other flat motors in bikes other than BMW, Ural, Dnepr.
Did you say God Wing? Well noted. But they're almost a car anyway.
Why hasn't anyone else "copied" the best bike in the world? Eh?
Because the design itself is doomed. That's why!
Self-inflating tyres, para-lever suspension, and other crap in an outdated design?
And at 50% higher cost? Not for me, sonny Jim.
But?
Yes, we do own a BMW.
But it's NOT a boxer.
So there you have it.
I don't want any of the "best bikes in the world", and have tried to state WHY.
And there are plenty of punters just like me, who seem to have a similar view.
Now shoot me down with a magazine of rubber bullets if you want.
But You'll be hard pressed to change my opinion.
But see if you can, my friend.
So what bikes *DO* I like?
You might think that I'm only interested in UJM's then. (Universal Japanese Motorcycles.)
But actually I'm not keen on UJM's. They do everything well, inexpensively ... and reliably.
Yet they're all the same: smooth, great performance, handling, brakes, etc.
Even so, they don't have much "character". I like a bit of SOUL and individuality.
So then for cruisers, Japan makes some good V-Twins. Think Boulevard, Star (Yamaha).
And the "English cruisers" (i.e. parallel twins) are neat too. Think Thunderbird.
American? Think Victory, Indian. ... H-D are not the only player.
For commuters, I think Korea, Japan.
For sport, I think Aprilia, KTM, Japan, Triumph, BMW (non-boxer). You know the bikes, I'm sure.
They don't have to have transverse 4 motors. What about twins and triples, even V-fours?
For trailies, enduros and motocross there's Japan, but also Husqvarna and KTM.
Then again, by 2020 all this may be history.
'Cos we may all be riding electric whizzers by then!
Treadlies should not be on the main roads
Their riders endanger themselves:
with no indicators, no brake lights, rarely mirrors, rarely used hand signals, and NO insurance.
What happens when they have an accident with another pushbike at 60 kph? (Or even 30kph?) All other road users pay.
Most don't use any safety gear - their helmets and lycra are a joke at 60 kph. (Or even at 15 kph.)
Have you ever seen ANY green strip without black skid marks (i.e. evidence of potentially fatal collisions)?
The riders frequently ignore the road rules - traffic lights & signs. And other road users have to compensate for them.
They cannot be identified - no licence plate, no personal identification required.
They pay NO "user pays" taxes, yet demand more, and more, cycle facilities and exemptions.
Even so, Canberra already has great cycle-ways.
BUT THEN, rather than just whinging about bicycle riders, I'll offer a positive alternative.
So here's what I suggest:
• all adult riders who want to ride their bicycles on the road have their driving licence
endorsed for bicycles for a fee of say $100 for the 5 years of their licence.
No test, as they (should) already know, and be applying the road rules.
Then they'll be covered for insurance, and at only $20 per year!
They can feel safe from bicycle / bicycle accidents, or even bicycle / pedestrian accidents.
• They be required to carry their licence at all times when on the road. (Or see option below.)
• They be required to follow the road rules just as all other vehicles are required to do,
and if they don't, then they lose points off the car licence, just as happens with motorcyclists.
• Riding at night without a light would bring a 3 licence point (safety) penalty, just like seat belts.
• An option could be that for their $100 they are given an ID underseat rear plate
that shows their driving licence number.
Now what could be fairer than that?
4 Wheel Drives are for the dangerous, selfish, irresponsible, pretentious
Update May 2022. I wrote the item below some years ago.
In the meantime, as usual, we've followed the US, 15 years later.
And lots of Aussies now drive SUV's. But mainly for the extra seat height, I suspect.
How many of those SUVs do you think actually go off-road?
Even so, much of what's below could now apply to those who drive Teslas, methinks.
We're told that at our current rate of consumption, we'll run out of lithium by 2040.
And lithium mining and "recycling" is suspect from an "environmental" viewpoint anyway.
So, until we have better batteries, owning a Tesla might just be pretentious "virtue signalling".
They are dangerous:
to their occupants:
the chassis is solid and the
vehicle is NOT designed to crumple.
("But I have air
bags".... Hmmm. And in the back, too? For your kids/passengers as well?)
they tip over quite easily.
to other cars:
they are 7 (seven) times more
dangerous in side impact collisions than regular cars.
(I wish I
could remember where I read this ... for quoting purposes.)
And then 4WD owners fit bull bars to protect THEMSELVES at the expense and safety of other road users! Yeah, good on you!
to pedestrians:
4WD's hit pedestrians at chest height. They don't have low sloping bonnets that catch pedestrians and lift them up and over the car, giving them a much better chance of survival. Instead, they just bash them at heart level - with a bull-bar!!! Yeah, good on you.
They are selfish:
They are a nuisance for their drivers to park, sometimes resulting in (accidental or other) "nudging" of nearby cars. They are also hard for other people to park near.
They obstruct other road users' view of the road.
They make it hard for passengers to get in and out of, as they are so high.
They are irresponsible:
They use more petrol and tyres than necessary.
They simply present and represent a self-centred status symbol.
Here's an example of what I mean: 4WD bumper sticker I saw today:
"BAN STUPID PEDESTRIANS, NOT BULLBARS"
NOTE:
If you own a Subaru or similar, you are exempted.
If you live in the mountains, or on a farm, you are exempted.
If you frequently use your 4WD for recreational activities, ...
such as bush-bashing, or towing a boat / caravan, you are exempted.
If your 4WD often has mud on it, or has new scratches on the sides, you are exempted.
But if you own a Toorak/Turramurra Tractor, then wake up to yourself! You might just be advertising your arrogance.
Next Rant ...
Not Hatched yet!!!