|
HotCanadianChick posted:Well, I'd argue if that's your metric for refinement, Harley V-twins have 105 years of refinement. Your move, Ducati. The ducati twin has quite literally been in production for 40 years. A 1974 air cooled ducati twin, is essentially the same as one from 2014. You've just got EFI and electronic ignition now. Nothing harley makes is more than 5-6 years old at this point. A 1970's sportster would be... a knucklehead? And now they're on a gen 2 evolution? They don't really share any parts.
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 06:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 21:21 |
|
|
Nerobro posted:The ducati twin has quite literally been in production for 40 years. A 1974 air cooled ducati twin, is essentially the same as one from 2014. You've just got EFI and electronic ignition now. Nothing harley makes is more than 5-6 years old at this point. A 1970's sportster would be... a knucklehead? And now they're on a gen 2 evolution? They don't really share any parts. A 1974 ducati air cooled twin is bevel drive though...? Belt drive started in the 80's. And lol at your self-contradicting argument that 'nothing harley makes is more than 5-6 years old at this point' but, at the same time, a modern ducati engine is 'essentially the same' as one from 1974 when I can guarantee that nothing ducati make is more than a decade old, either, if you compared part numbers and casting/machining/assembly techniques etc. But this completely irrelevant anyway because a monster 1200 is a liquid cooled 8 valve engine. Thus rendering this entire discussion completely retarded and stupid. My two cents are that a monster 1200 and a striple 675 are different strokes for different folks and that more capacity and power does not necessarily mean it's a better bike for everyone. Fuckit, I'm going to edit this for a second time: Nero what you said really gets under my skin because it's the kind of moronic pub-talk generalisation that makes people say dumb poo poo like 'jap crap' and 'harleys are all slow and poo poo etc' and stereotype other people who ride based on half-imagined truthisms. I don't like car analogies, generally, but this seems perfect: Saying a modern ducati engine is essentially the same as a 1974 ducati engine is about as clarksonesque as saying an LS2 is essentially the same as a 350 chevy from 1970. Well guess what. They loving aren't. Even a cursory examination of the technical aspects that goes deeper than 'hurr durr same capacity pushrod v8' will lead you to realise that the two engines are completely incompatible and only 'the same' inasmuch as they have the same general configuration and similar dimensions for legacy reasons. To think that not two weeks ago I got lambasted on this very forum for saying the new EBR engines are basically the same as the old liquid cooled buells when they bought the loving tooling off rotax to make the new ones. Christ. Nsap I kind of get you now. Slavvy fucked around with this message at 08:32 on Jul 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 08:04
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:GSXR's are shaped really funny and extremely uncomfortable. Panigale is the same in a completely different way, just taller. Guess it depends on the person - I've ridden extensively or owned all of the 600's (R6, CBR600RR, 675, GSXR750 - same frame as the 600, and ZX6R) and found that the GSXR is the most liveable ergo wise as a street bike. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 08:38
|
|
|
PadreScout posted:OK, ... I done gone and hosed up. I was out helping a coworker look at bikes. He wants a Street Triple like mine. So we went to the Euro motorcycle house. He takes a test ride, I ride along with him on my Triple. He loves it. Well, he continues to test ride "similar machines" a monster 690..whatever and I commented how I kind of wanted one- so the sales guy talked me into test riding a Monster 1200. This is what I was talking about when I test-rode the Striple then went back to my Shiver. I know that the Shiver makes less power (although not much), and in a few ways is not as good as the Triple R, but the Shiver is just so loving dramatic about things that it feels ten times faster and a hundred times more special when you're just puttering around in traffic. And ultimately what's most important about a bike is how it makes you feel, not what numbers on a sheet say. I just loving wish Piaggio would sort their poo poo out and let Aprilia release the Shiver 1200. As it is it's looking increasingly like my next bike is just going to be another 750 Shiver (because it now has a black frame so is more black than my current one, and I want the ABS and uprated suspension and brakes) but frankly, after a half-dozen test rides (but not of a Ducati because I've not found a dealer willing to let me try) I'm still convinced that the Shiver is my perfect bike.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 08:53
|
|
That was the most fun I've had on a bike in a while. They started me in touring mode and showed me how to switch it to sport, so 3 blocks up the road I switched it. That machine is something else. My triumph isn't slow. It's a loving composed lady that can throw down with the best of them, but that loving duck was like.... a caged animal that desperately wants to gently caress poo poo up. I'd nail the fucker roll on hard until I feel the front lighten up, then relax my wrist just enough to drop weight on the front and then roll on hard again.... jesus christ it just... lunges. There is no other way to describe it. Great brakes, great transmission. Handles.... Unique, the steering almost pretends to be heavy but the motherfucker just lock up and tracks. I circle back a few blocks then entered the highway on the on-ramp directly in front of the dealership and rode it on up the on-ramp pretty hard. When we got back my father (who was in the area and had stopped by for fun) commented that they heard, then seen me rocking up the on-ramp and it sounded like the MotoGP had come to town. Then a few seconds later and about 150 yards behind me came my buddy roaring by on his Streety he was test riding.
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:This is what I was talking about when I test-rode the Striple then went back to my Shiver. I know that the Shiver makes less power (although not much), and in a few ways is not as good as the Triple R, but the Shiver is just so loving dramatic about things that it feels ten times faster and a hundred times more special when you're just puttering around in traffic. And ultimately what's most important about a bike is how it makes you feel, not what numbers on a sheet say. Haven't they got a Doso 1200? It's basically the same only different.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 09:05
|
|
|
Linedance posted:Haven't they got a Doso 1200? It's basically the same only different. Yeah that's the annoying thing, the 1200 engine was designed for the Shiver but they put it in the Dorsoduro and the Caponord, no doubt convinced they'd destroy BMW and their big "adventure" bikes, and unsurprisingly nothing happened, so they've "postponed" the launch of the Shiver 1200 for three years now. (I've test-rode the Caponord and it's a loving fantastic motor, literally exactly the same delivery as the 750 but more so, and I'd have the Caponord - ugly face or not - in an instant if it could fit through my garden gate. I wouldn't have the Dorsoduro because just sitting on it at the dealer gave me saddle sores, that's a loving uncomfortable seat) e: The rumour is that they don't want to repeat their pre-bankruptcy policy of competing with themselves so don't want to release something that would possibly compete with the Tuono, which is also why they never released the original prototype Shiver that was basically a Mille with the 750 engine. I suppose it makes a sort of sense but gently caress me it's annoying that they finally start showing common sense. goddamnedtwisto fucked around with this message at 09:24 on Jul 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 09:18
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:My two cents are that a monster 1200 and a striple 675 are different strokes for different folks and that more capacity and power does not necessarily mean it's a better bike for everyone. The base Street has fairly cheap suspension and brakes. The Street R gets the base Daytona parts. The Daytona R parts are in the ballpark of the Duc 12, and you can't get them OEM on a Street. The Ducati is also considerably more expensive than any of those Triumphs, so for the money you could do some serious aftermarket suspension / brake work to the Triumphs to where they'd probably run circles around a stock Duc 12 in the tight stuff. Of course, one would have the I3 snarl and the other the L2 roar; can't really dial out that personal preference. Or you could get the Tuono V4R APRC and render the other options irrelevant
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 09:36
|
|
|
I thought we all decided the ktm 1290 is the best bike now??
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 11:56
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:Christ. Nsap I kind of get you now. What does Jap Crap even mean? I get that Harlies are slow. My colleagues keep telling me that when I get older I'll appreciate a Harley because I'll be okay with going slow and just cruising. Eh at this point I no longer judge people regarding their bike choice. I judge them based on what they are wearing on their bike. If you don't have a helmet on but are wearing a head bandana, leather vest, and chaps then I am free to think you are all about image and are likely a douche.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 12:27
|
|
|
It is my understanding that "Jap Crap" is basically a pejorative which implies that by very nature of being Japanese - something is of inferior quality (generally assumed in this context to American equivalents.) It's one of those charming colloquialisms that gain traction with the sort of people that love "Rolling Coal" and "Harley!" because that's "American"!! when they are intellectually incapable of making the distinction between "patriotism" and "nationalism." I thought the 1290 was fraggoing some airbox seal or some poo poo and destroying their fancy high output engines. Did they fix that, then?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 13:11
|
|
|
Crayvex posted:I was thinking the same thing... It's an appeal to cheap patriotism   . Some guy gave me poo poo for my BMW in a gas station once, calling it Kraut crap and that I wasn't a "real American" or something to that effect. I pointed to my Dept. of Defense sticker (since I was still in the military then) and told him to read it and then tell me again that I'm not a real American. The contortions his face made were pretty funny.Actually, as I get older, it's not so much as I'm not okay with going slow, but I still want the option to go fast if desired. Watching your average H-D bagger trying to pass some car on the highway is an exercise in visual torture.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 13:29
|
|
|
Refinement doesn't mean they share the same parts. I'm sure the BMW twin doesn't share parts from the 1950s models but the current model is refined from previous generations. With regard to motors I think Harley does a pretty OK job. The one sportster I rode was total garbage with the exception of the motor. Once off idle it was smooth and torquey. The Ducati L twin is the same except it's smooth everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 15:18
|
|
|
Currently on a Highway 101 road trip and feel  every time I see a motorcycle on the road.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
WTF is everyone babbling on about sayin "herp-derp Harley's are slow"? Because they wont do 150mph? They're not loving track bikes and no one should be doing that on the road anyway (me included since I've been guilty of 160+ on an empty stretch of highway on my GSXR750). I've got a big ol' softail now that has no problems accelerating out of dodgy situations and is comfortable cruising at 90+ mph. I also have no problems throwing its 750lbs through corners with ease, gasp, AT SPEED due to its extremely low CoG. Is it a rocket? No. But it's by no means a slug either. It's the riders that are slow, but that is with any bike. /harley defense
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
Harleys aren't slow. But when the average rider doesn't take them above 2500 rpm, then they certainly seem that way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
I'm in Seaside, Oregon right now. A dual sport/enduro would be the perfect bike around here, and if it was Washington I could go ride on the beach! I'll have to take the enduro on a weekend trip to ocean shores or somewhere once its sorted out again. Edit: the only thing a Harley has going for it is torque. My 99 m900 makes better power and weighs over 100 lb less than a 1200 sportster but doesn't need rubber mounting points to keep it from vibrating my fillings out. That's a 2-valve air-cooled v-twin, too, the only differences are pushrods vs desmo and v angle tuned for potato rather than power. Probably more maintenance on the duc, too, but I think its simple to work on. Slim Pickens fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Jul 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
Slim Pickens posted:I'm in Seaside, Oregon right now. A dual sport/enduro would be the perfect bike around here, and if it was Washington I could go ride on the beach! I'll have to take the enduro on a weekend trip to ocean shores or somewhere once its sorted out again. Most of the good DOONZ riding is in Oregon. Show up with a paddle and a flag.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
n8r posted:Most of the good DOONZ riding is in Oregon. Show up with a paddle and a flag. Last time I did that I got a life time ban from Holiday Inn ...oh... flag
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
I just wanna wheelie at will along the hardpacked sand next to the water for a bit, not big on dune riding.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
EX250 Type R posted:Last time I did that I got a life time ban from Holiday Inn I wondered why they had a picture of a guy lookin' like a Minecraft character behind the counter with a big NO under it
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
Don't hate, its bad enough every time i look in a mirror its like DK mode is enabled
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:A 1974 ducati air cooled twin is bevel drive though...? Belt drive started in the 80's. And lol at your self-contradicting argument that 'nothing harley makes is more than 5-6 years old at this point' but, at the same time, a modern ducati engine is 'essentially the same' as one from 1974 when I can guarantee that nothing ducati make is more than a decade old, either, if you compared part numbers and casting/machining/assembly techniques etc. I think we're talking two different things. Ducati has gone on to build other engines. I"m not saying the Monster 1200 motor is the same as the 800cc air cooled mill that they've been making forever. You're going to make me dig out my books to verify the years that the belt driven air cooled twin has been produced. I don't agree with what N8r was talking about, but when someone came back and said "hurr harley has been making the same motor forever" well.. they're wrong. The suzuki 400-500cc twin has been in production nearly as long. Though I think they dropped production of it last year.. Truthfully, "new is better" in this case. Engines have gotten better over the decades.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Bike sold! Now I just need to wait for the SR400 to actually arrive at one of the dealers. I am apparently pretty low on a rather long wait list.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
Nerobro posted:
I think the whole "refinement of engines" tangent started because N8r interpreted my "The Triumph Street Triple is a more refined motocycle than the Monster 1200." statement to be "The Triumph has a more refined engine."
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 20:37
|
|
|
Yes your triumph is so refined when you twist the throttle you have to stick your pinky out
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
ScienceAndMusic posted:Bike sold! Now I just need to wait for the SR400 to actually arrive at one of the dealers. I am apparently pretty low on a rather long wait list. Why are you buying a SR400 and what did you sell to get it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:To think that not two weeks ago I got lambasted on this very forum for saying the new EBR engines are basically the same as the old liquid cooled buells when they bought the loving tooling off rotax to make the new ones. Christ. Nsap I kind of get you now. I'm not that nuts. ScienceandMusic I thought you had a bike lined up already. You might be waiting a while with your location if you're at the bottom of the list.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
Nerobro posted:I think we're talking two different things. Ducati has gone on to build other engines. I"m not saying the Monster 1200 motor is the same as the 800cc air cooled mill that they've been making forever. You're going to make me dig out my books to verify the years that the belt driven air cooled twin has been produced. Well yes, but manufacturers don't just go "Here's an engine" then never touch it again. This got me thinking what the oldest engine still in production use actually is. First thought was Royal Enfield of course but they switched to unit construction in the last decade so it's hard to say that it's the "same" engine that's been used since the 50s. Other long-runner engines (BMW and Guzzi air-cooled twins, the oil-cooled Suzuki GS (which I think is now officially retired)) underwent constant revision throughout their lives which means they have almost no components in common with the original units. I eventually settled (because I really know nothing about Harley engines) as the Rotax 990 which debuted in 1998 in the RSV Mille and is still in use by Can-Am and kit builders. Of course car engines have bike engines well-beat in longevity stakes, the Rover V8 has been going for almost 50 years and still turns up, almost unrecognisable (bored out to 5 litres for a start) in Range Rovers. So here's a philosophical quandary for everyone - just how different does an engine need to be to be classified as "new"? I wouldn't class things like changes to EFI as making a new engine, nor improvements like new cams or even head and piston profile changes, as they can be annual changes on some models (and nobody would claim that, say, the Street Triple and Daytona don't have the "same" engine even though there's a lot of differences).
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
Braincloud posted:I also have no problems throwing its 750lbs through corners with ease, gasp, AT SPEED due to its extremely low CoG. Low CoG reduces stability at any speed other than 0. goddamnedtwisto posted:Well yes, but manufacturers don't just go "Here's an engine" then never touch it again. This got me thinking what the oldest engine still in production use actually is. First thought was Royal Enfield of course but they switched to unit construction in the last decade so it's hard to say that it's the "same" engine that's been used since the 50s. Other long-runner engines (BMW and Guzzi air-cooled twins, the oil-cooled Suzuki GS (which I think is now officially retired)) underwent constant revision throughout their lives which means they have almost no components in common with the original units. I eventually settled (because I really know nothing about Harley engines) as the Rotax 990 which debuted in 1998 in the RSV Mille and is still in use by Can-Am and kit builders. The air cooled GS's can swap parts from 1977 though 2013 or whatever year they discontinued the GS500. The gear ratios didn't change. The crank only had two changes over the decades. The charging system didn't change. The starter didn't change. The starter cover didnt' change. The side covers saw one change. (when they dropped the kickstarter in 1980..) The crankcase saw two changes, the first was the change to plain bearings, the second was a cast in blockoff for the GS500F oil cooler. There have been a grand total of two oil pumps. They even used the same carbs. I haven't had the chance to dig out the book yet, but IIRC the ducati 750 motor is the same story. I think the ducati went under more changes than the GS motor, but you can still put a modern ducati 750 motor in a 1970's bike without really doing anything other than pulling bolts. The BMW twins underwent major revisions every few years, that's where you get oilheads, airheads, etc. Between generations, they only really share "size" not mount points, stroke, bore, or even cooling methods. We'd need to have Rev talk on that. I don't know Guzzi's motors. goddamnedtwisto posted:So here's a philosophical quandary for everyone - just how different does an engine need to be to be classified as "new"? I wouldn't class things like changes to EFI as making a new engine, nor improvements like new cams or even head and piston profile changes, as they can be annual changes on some models (and nobody would claim that, say, the Street Triple and Daytona don't have the "same" engine even though there's a lot of differences). I'd venture to say that as soon as it's not a direct bolt in replacement, it's no longer the same engine. If you've changed the motor enough that it won't fit in the same place.. it's not the same thing anymore. Nerobro fucked around with this message at 21:09 on Jul 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
Not necessarily. I've seen car engines where the block is cast differently for different engine mount positions yet literally everything else is interchanged and you could easily build identical engines with 'different' blocks. Ultimately I don't think it's a binary thing where you can draw a clear line; just like a bunch of other poo poo in this messy reality, there's no easy right answer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
Slim Pickens posted:I'm in Seaside, Oregon right now. A dual sport/enduro would be the perfect bike around here, and if it was Washington I could go ride on the beach! I'll have to take the enduro on a weekend trip to ocean shores or somewhere once its sorted out again. There are some nice huge dunes you can ride ATVs on (in Oregon anything from a dirt bike to a quad or 4x4 pickup can be registered as an off-road 'ATV', just gotta pay for the permit sticker), but they're further south, between Seaside and Florence. Nerobro posted:I'd venture to say that as soon as it's not a direct bolt in replacement, it's no longer the same engine. If you've changed the motor enough that it won't fit in the same place.. it's not the same thing anymore. A modern Chevy LS3 bolts into the same transmissions and motor mounts as a 60's vintage 350, but they're decidedly and radically different motors with next to nothing in common other than being V8s with a 90 degree bank angle. That's a really daft creteria to base "engine is saem!!" on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
Nerobro posted:Low CoG reduces stability at any speed other than 0. That must be why they make motoGP bikes on stilts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
ReverendCode posted:That must be why they make motoGP bikes on stilts. More or less, they do. Mass centralization has that effect. it's good for cornering. But you pay the price in braking and acceleration. If they cared more about braking and acceleration, they'd be pushing the blocks, riders, and fuel tanks, lower. Instead the fuel tanks moved to the center, in an effort to reduce the change in CG, not lower it. Motors have moved up, and forward. The only thing "low" on bikes now is the oil sump. High CG's have some real benefits on motorcycles. It reduces the frequency of headstock hunt. It gives you a better chance of recovering from a front end slide. It reduces the lean angle for a given tire width. And there's more. Now.. if your goal is 0-60 time.. or braking.. well low CG is the thing. HotCanadianChick posted:There are some nice huge dunes you can ride ATVs on (in Oregon anything from a dirt bike to a quad or 4x4 pickup can be registered as an off-road 'ATV', just gotta pay for the permit sticker), but they're further south, between Seaside and Florence. I hadn't thought about car engines. :-) Well I'm still open to suggestions. Cylinder spacing? I dunno. And then there are some strange parts bin relations. Like v6's that have the same valves and rockers, crank throw, rods, pistons as the v8 relative. But.. would I call it the same engine? I don't know. There's also the v12 GMC that is a pair of v6's sitting in a new block. I'd call that the same engine family, since most of the insides are the same. Nerobro fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Jul 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
Nerobro posted:The BMW twins underwent major revisions every few years, that's where you get oilheads, airheads, etc. Between generations, they only really share "size" not mount points, stroke, bore, or even cooling methods. We'd need to have Rev talk on that. I don't know Guzzi's motors.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
Rev. Dr. Moses P. Lester posted:BMW had minimal changes from 1970-1994. Electrical changed the most. Carbs went up in size, displacement changed a couple times but not by much. A 1970 engine will bolt in a 1994 frame. Driveshaft/swingarm changed a bit depending on what model you're talking about. Similar situation from 1995-2004 or so. Then 04-12 or so. Just the last year or two they came out with the water cooled boxer with a unit construction engine, probably the biggest change made since rigid frames and side valves in WW2. Well that's something. What years did oil head, air head, 2 valve, 4 valve changes hit?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
Honda's been using the same 250cc twin for a long rear end time, haven't they? First the CM250 then the rebel, but they're selling those things as cheap beginner bikes. Not a lot of need for engine refinement there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
Yeah, but Honda is definitely not one to talk about having interchangeable parts. Forget changing from model to model, or year to year -- they like to make undocumented changes in the middle of a production run. Pull an engine out of a 1975 model and find that, for no apparent reason, one of the mounting bolts is an inch and a half forwards of where it is on the 1973 model. Or buy a camshaft off eBay, look at the new one and puzzle over why it looks different from the old one, then look it up and discover that no, the engines are NOT the same internally and the timing and lift are different from one model to the next, even though Honda never mentioned this in any of the literature. Depending on how you feel about Honda, they either do it because they relentlessly pursue perfection no matter the cost, or because they just can't leave well enough alone for just one minute goddamnit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 05:44
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Yeah, but Honda is definitely not one to talk about having interchangeable parts. Forget changing from model to model, or year to year -- they like to make undocumented changes in the middle of a production run. Pull an engine out of a 1975 model and find that, for no apparent reason, one of the mounting bolts is an inch and a half forwards of where it is on the 1973 model. Or buy a camshaft off eBay, look at the new one and puzzle over why it looks different from the old one, then look it up and discover that no, the engines are NOT the same internally and the timing and lift are different from one model to the next, even though Honda never mentioned this in any of the literature. This is the argument I get into as part of whether silly hipsters should buy a 40-year old Honda or try to find a 5-year-old Bonnie on Craigslist. Never mind that the Bonnie looks and is much closer to whatever '70s impersonation of a '50s gangster they're trying to ape. "You're going to need replacement parts on the old bike, and you're going to have a giant pain in the rear end scouring eBay for them, and the bike is going to sit and rot while you wait for parts. Triumph will have everything you need within three weeks." "They made a bazillion Hondas, there's tons and tons of parts." "No, no, there isn't. Because Honda changed little poo poo every six months, if you try to use parts from years and models that you think are close enough you're going to be endlessly frustrated. The number of bikes with parts common to yours is going to be much closer to Bonnie production, and that was decades ago." "Well, I'm sure dealers still have bunches of those parts around." "No, because they probably cleaned their shelves off sometime in the '90s when those bikes were worthless and tossed it all. Buy the loving Triumph already." ~ignores advice, buys some 1976 Hondamatic, never gets it to crank~
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
HNasty posted:Why are you buying a SR400 and what did you sell to get it? Sold a 1980 kz 550 that was nothing but problems. And I'm getting an SR400 because I am a human piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 21:21 |
|
|
I'm surprised the CB1100 isn't more popular. My local dealer has apparently had trouble selling them, which kinda surprises me considering the interest in retro styled bikes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 13:50
|
|
