The speed triple in roulette green is the only motorcycle I have ever truly lusted after.
Toshi's thread
- Thread starter Toshi
- Start date
R6 and GSX-R, etc. have no ABS. GSX650F is heavier than my bike--if I go sportbike I don't want more weight!Have you looked at the R6 or my fave a Suzuki GSX650F?
The ER6F or ER6N is also quite a nice ride.
ER6 variants are my bike minus the stilts. I want fancier cartridge suspension and more oomph, not necessarily 3rd-gear-wheelie torque but not a feeling of running out up top.
Do you like the new one, no longer round-eyed? That'd be the one I'd go for for the ABS.The speed triple in roulette green is the only motorcycle I have ever truly lusted after.
No round headlights or roulette green? They have ruined it. I would hope you, Mr. High Visibility, could appreciate the obnoxiously awesome green.Do you like the new one, no longer round-eyed? That'd be the one I'd go for for the ABS.
The round headlights gave it character, a blend of the old and new. For me the old design had a timeless character. The new one looks like, well a modern bike.
Probably still a very nice bike. When I was drooling over them 15 or so years ago they seemed to have some very nice details that other bikes didn't. I'm guessing those have probably disappeared over time in the name of cost cutting.
Probably still a very nice bike. When I was drooling over them 15 or so years ago they seemed to have some very nice details that other bikes didn't. I'm guessing those have probably disappeared over time in the name of cost cutting.
Last edited:
Capsule review:
Syma S107 3 channel R/C helicopter.
$129.95 MSRP, but before you roll your eyes note that it's sold by Amazon.com for around $22 ("twenty two dollars", not a typo) shipped. Charges via the controller or, in a nice AA battery-saving touch, via a USB cable from one's computer. 3 channel operation so you get throttle, rotation, and pitch. No yaw control so no crabbing, and the limits on the controls are set very modestly to avoid losing control. With its flappy counterrotating main rotors and an on-board gyro (I think) it's actually really stable and easy to fly, at least for the 5 minutes or so until the on board Li-poly cell goes flat.
For $22 it's a most excellent deal. Sure, it'd be nice to have something faster and more capable but for flying around the house to kill time not a bad little toy at all. It's markedly better in its flying stability, ease of use, and build quality (at first impression) than the Think Geek "Black Stealth 3 ch" one that cost me the princely sum of $34.48 shipped back in 2008.
Syma S107 3 channel R/C helicopter.
$129.95 MSRP, but before you roll your eyes note that it's sold by Amazon.com for around $22 ("twenty two dollars", not a typo) shipped. Charges via the controller or, in a nice AA battery-saving touch, via a USB cable from one's computer. 3 channel operation so you get throttle, rotation, and pitch. No yaw control so no crabbing, and the limits on the controls are set very modestly to avoid losing control. With its flappy counterrotating main rotors and an on-board gyro (I think) it's actually really stable and easy to fly, at least for the 5 minutes or so until the on board Li-poly cell goes flat.
For $22 it's a most excellent deal. Sure, it'd be nice to have something faster and more capable but for flying around the house to kill time not a bad little toy at all. It's markedly better in its flying stability, ease of use, and build quality (at first impression) than the Think Geek "Black Stealth 3 ch" one that cost me the princely sum of $34.48 shipped back in 2008.
Moral of the story: Don't buy a CBR600F4i if you're going to ride where Killboy is hanging out?
More seriously, the tail rider is more vertical than his bike. He should have paid more attention to the sumo rider ahead of him. 
Last edited:
I'm back from a whirlwind vacation out west. Here are some highlights:
In addition to the Cannon Beach beach trike above I also rode 15 miles around Seattle, at Duthie and Tokul East if you know the area. Those rides, with lots of climbing, totally kicked my ass, and then I fell mid-calf-deep into thick mud. Whoops. In any case, it was nice to get on the bike again with some old riding buddies.
Portraits of family galore can be seen at the full gallery, but are probably not that interesting unless you know them:
Old people delighted by Steve Jobs handiwork:
Cats:
Food:
Haystack Rock via iPhone:
A toilet on a random Seattle street corner for good measure:
Finally, our weeklong average mileage in our 2010 Prius rental:
In addition to the Cannon Beach beach trike above I also rode 15 miles around Seattle, at Duthie and Tokul East if you know the area. Those rides, with lots of climbing, totally kicked my ass, and then I fell mid-calf-deep into thick mud. Whoops. In any case, it was nice to get on the bike again with some old riding buddies.
Portraits of family galore can be seen at the full gallery, but are probably not that interesting unless you know them:
Old people delighted by Steve Jobs handiwork:
Cats:
Food:
Haystack Rock via iPhone:
A toilet on a random Seattle street corner for good measure:
Finally, our weeklong average mileage in our 2010 Prius rental:
Between vacation last week, driving the Prius the week before while working nights (as Jessica was out of town), and being on the bicycle and the Versys before that I haven't driven my Honda Fit in about a month... and now its battery is dead as a result.
Whoops.
I might end up putting the car on a battery tender, irony of ironies.
Whoops.
I might end up putting the car on a battery tender, irony of ironies.
I drove a Porsche 911 today for several hours. The sky was blue, the top was down, and the road windy and beautiful, yet I emerged unimpressed. What's more, I realized that I've become an old man without knowing it. Read on to find out how this came to pass.
Who, Where, and How Much?
The nitty gritty details: I came to drive the Porsche through Steam Car Rentals, via a Groupon 1/2 off deal. After a scheduling/availability mixup on Steam's part giving me some extra, free time and the purchase of extra miles the total cost came to $150 (not including gas). That not-so-princely sum let me drive a Porsche 911 120 miles between the allotted hours of 9:30 AM to 5:30 PM. Which specific model of Porsche 911, you ask? Unfortunately, as a 2002 model it's from the worst modern generation, the 996. Worse yet, it's a Tiptronic Cabriolet. Oh well, beggars can't be choosers. One can rent nicer exotic cars here in NY, or in LA, Vegas, or Miami, but none at a price close to what I paid.
First Impression
Seeing the car in the flesh didn't blow me away, to say the least. The 996 front clip somehow manages to be featureless, bland, and ugly simultaneously, and the somewhat tired blue paint on this model didn't do it any favors. See the photo above to see what I mean. The rear of the car is more attractive than the front, sure, but it's that dopey face with slightly yellowed plastic headlight surrounds that one sees first.
Things got worse when it came to the interior, colored throughout in a rather putrid flavor of mustard: mustard leather, mustard plastic surrounds with parts-bin black switchgear, not-quite-mustard-but-who's-keeping-track-anyway carpeting. Despite having a reasonable 49,xxx miles for a 2002 model the interior looked the worse for wear, too, certainly in much worse shape than our 90,000 mile Prius.
Things in particular that I found particularly unattractive: the design of the 996's dashboard in general, with swathes of plastic and cheap switchgear everywhere arrayed in a stodgy design; the tacky and plasticky feeling mustard-colored leather on the steering wheel; the cruise control lever that moved about with an unnerving bending-plastic sensation; the parking brake handle that slid off the underlying lever with the slightest provocation; and the aftermarket pop-out screen stereo that always turned itself on and attempted to unfurl itself at each startup, regardless of its prior state.
Also less than impressive was the soft top's operation, which was slow and without a definite endpoint. After raising or lowering the top, which is only possible when stopped with the parking brake engaged, I'd find myself still sitting there for a few more seconds with my finger on the button just to make sure the process was completed.
Whew. Not a great first impression, one might conclude.
A very short discourse on fuel
I was surprised to see the gas gauge's needle hover at just under 1/4 of a tank when I fired the car up initially. The gentleman from Steam who was signing the car out to me was nonplussed, and said to just bring it back at the same level. This seemed really amateurish, more fit for when one's buddy borrows one's car: "Oh, just bring it back with the same amount of gas, yeah?" I've never rented a car from an outfit where the car wasn't delivered to me with a full fuel tank before.
On the open road
After this inauspicious start my wife hopped in and we finally got on the open road. Initially, actually, said road was none too open: as you may or may not have read above we picked the car up from its garage in the Wall Street area of Manhattan. Thus, the initial few miles were along the periphery of the island, past the Javits Center, USS Intrepid and docked cruise ships, and up towards the George Washington Bridge.
As one might guess, that meant driving in traffic.
Driving in traffic is not the most pleasant experience in a low sports car. Having "normal cars" at the moment, I'd almost forgotten what it feels like to be below, well, everything, but I was quickly reacquainted with the sensation that I'd known before with a few of my prior cars. To be specific, my old 1990 Nissan 300ZX and 2004 Mazda RX-8 had a similar feeling in traffic. My WRX was basically normal-car-height despite being lowered, and didn't suffer from this issue. I did not like this feeling, no sir, and in general the car field unwieldy and awkward in traffic. The transmission would start off the line in 2nd gear unless specifically told not to while in manual mode, and the steering was heavy yet without a quick ratio.
On the plus side, the exhaust did make a nice burble at low revs, and outward visibility was entirely unimpeded, even to the front. Confused? Because of my oddly-tall upper body and even-more-oddly large head I end up staring at the sun visor when in a Miata. I had no such problems with the 911's seat:windshield orientation, and found a very comfortable driving position behind the telescoping wheel.
Eventually, the road did open up. We crossed over into New Jersey and headed north on the Palisades Parkway towards Bear Mountain, and eventually wound up the twisty Perkins Memorial Drive to the lookout itself. Once out of the traffic the height of the car ceased to be an issue, and indeed didn't cross my mind any more. Instead, I was distracted by all the noises that car made. The dashboard would creak slightly, the right front wheelwell or mirror emitted an almost vocal wind noise at highway speeds, and something in the left rear quarter panel behind me would complain each time the car hit a pothole. Then there was the wind noise itself, whooshing away mightily and impeding conversation. It wasn't nearly as loud as, say, on a motorcycle at highway speed, but was loud enough that my wife and I quickly agreed that for our own future cars the wind noise and body rigidity compromises overshadow the ability to open up a patch of sky overhead. No convertibles for us, in other words.
Not all was horrible, of course: the car pulled reasonably well in 1st and 2nd gear, feeling nippier than my old RX-8 but certainly not nearly as violent as my now-deceased 297 wheel horsepower modified WRX; roll control was excellent; I didn't even come close to finding the limits of grip on any roundabout or tight bend; and gas mileage wasn't bad, with an observed 21+ mpg. The classic dashboard layout was also pleasing to the eye and easy to decipher, with the tachometer front and center, and, as I mentioned above, the driving position and visibility were both excellent.
The sports car and the modern driving experience
The problem is that these positive things--the bursts of acceleration, the feeling of hustling through a corner--were few and far between because of traffic. There always was a cop around the next bend (almost literally on the Palisades) or a slow-moving automobile, Harley rider, or spandex-clad road biker in the way. Yeah, yeah, it was a nice Sunday on Memorial Day weekend, sure, but the reality is that most driving is similar to this: one can only go as fast as the next car ahead, and roads that'd be entertaining at 8/10ths, legality aside, are quite boring at 2/10ths.
Besides being ugly due to its generation, cursed with a cheap-feeling interior in a horrible color scheme, and being an automatic, the car was hobbled by the real world. In a real world full of potholes, traffic, and other road users the Porsche just felt stupid. When I test drove a Lexus LS a few months back I mentioned how sliding behind its wheel made me feel like a million bucks. What I didn't mention is that part of that feeling was because it made me feel disconnected from the tumult and chaos outside the car, somehow superior to it all. In the Porsche, I didn't feel disconnected from the world outside, but instead felt each bump and heard the distinct timbre of road noise emanating from every other car on the road. Furthermore, when not driving like a hoon and just cruising along with the traffic the car didn't feel special at all, perhaps the biggest criticism of it of all.
Implications
I've always loved sports cars for the thrill they provide at the autocross, track, or on a favorite bit of road after midnight, but living with their compromises hasn't been a cakewalk. The 300ZX, with its dark tinted windows, was absolutely terrifying to back up at night. The WRX, with its coilovers and aftermarket center differential, struck a very poor compromise between ride comfort and handling, doing neither particularly well. The RX-8 was the best of the lot as an all-around package, but would have been better with 50 more horsepower, 5 more mpg, 2" more headroom, and without its unfortunate flooding "quirk."
Despite this, my inner 5 year-old boy has been telling me that I still should want a sports car. Why? To carve up a tasty, twisty road, of course. Well, that's what I set out to do with this Porsche today, and I have to say that it wasn't all that fun. The grins from the roundabouts, rare twisty bits without traffic, and onramps were more than offset by the ride quality, road noise, and cheap interior. What's more, I routinely ride my motorcycle on the same route that I drove today, and find doing so to be a much more engaging, visceral experience.
This brings me to my current dream car, the Nissan GT-R. It's a match in all regards except for price and prestige for the Porsche 911 Turbo, a much nicer and much more expensive version of the model of Porsche I drove today. It can corner so violently so as to cause Jeremy Clarkson's neck to seize up. It represents a high point in Japanese auto engineering achievement, and I take pride in that. It's something that I could afford in a few years, and I had convinced myself more or less that it's what I wanted--after all, what self-respecting boy would turn down a chance to actually fulfill his dream?
But would I have had more fun today had I been driving a GT-R instead of this admittedly flawed Porsche? Or would I have had more fun had I been on the motorcycle? More to the point, would I have had $90,000 worth of fun?
I think I know the answers to these questions, and I think it means that I'm officially an old man, older even than my father, who just bought himself that Corvette he always wanted. Yes, I think that I have outgrown my love of sports cars. Who would have thought a 29 year old could be past middle age already?
Who, Where, and How Much?
The nitty gritty details: I came to drive the Porsche through Steam Car Rentals, via a Groupon 1/2 off deal. After a scheduling/availability mixup on Steam's part giving me some extra, free time and the purchase of extra miles the total cost came to $150 (not including gas). That not-so-princely sum let me drive a Porsche 911 120 miles between the allotted hours of 9:30 AM to 5:30 PM. Which specific model of Porsche 911, you ask? Unfortunately, as a 2002 model it's from the worst modern generation, the 996. Worse yet, it's a Tiptronic Cabriolet. Oh well, beggars can't be choosers. One can rent nicer exotic cars here in NY, or in LA, Vegas, or Miami, but none at a price close to what I paid.
First Impression
Seeing the car in the flesh didn't blow me away, to say the least. The 996 front clip somehow manages to be featureless, bland, and ugly simultaneously, and the somewhat tired blue paint on this model didn't do it any favors. See the photo above to see what I mean. The rear of the car is more attractive than the front, sure, but it's that dopey face with slightly yellowed plastic headlight surrounds that one sees first.
Things got worse when it came to the interior, colored throughout in a rather putrid flavor of mustard: mustard leather, mustard plastic surrounds with parts-bin black switchgear, not-quite-mustard-but-who's-keeping-track-anyway carpeting. Despite having a reasonable 49,xxx miles for a 2002 model the interior looked the worse for wear, too, certainly in much worse shape than our 90,000 mile Prius.
Things in particular that I found particularly unattractive: the design of the 996's dashboard in general, with swathes of plastic and cheap switchgear everywhere arrayed in a stodgy design; the tacky and plasticky feeling mustard-colored leather on the steering wheel; the cruise control lever that moved about with an unnerving bending-plastic sensation; the parking brake handle that slid off the underlying lever with the slightest provocation; and the aftermarket pop-out screen stereo that always turned itself on and attempted to unfurl itself at each startup, regardless of its prior state.
Also less than impressive was the soft top's operation, which was slow and without a definite endpoint. After raising or lowering the top, which is only possible when stopped with the parking brake engaged, I'd find myself still sitting there for a few more seconds with my finger on the button just to make sure the process was completed.
Whew. Not a great first impression, one might conclude.
A very short discourse on fuel
I was surprised to see the gas gauge's needle hover at just under 1/4 of a tank when I fired the car up initially. The gentleman from Steam who was signing the car out to me was nonplussed, and said to just bring it back at the same level. This seemed really amateurish, more fit for when one's buddy borrows one's car: "Oh, just bring it back with the same amount of gas, yeah?" I've never rented a car from an outfit where the car wasn't delivered to me with a full fuel tank before.
On the open road
After this inauspicious start my wife hopped in and we finally got on the open road. Initially, actually, said road was none too open: as you may or may not have read above we picked the car up from its garage in the Wall Street area of Manhattan. Thus, the initial few miles were along the periphery of the island, past the Javits Center, USS Intrepid and docked cruise ships, and up towards the George Washington Bridge.
As one might guess, that meant driving in traffic.
Driving in traffic is not the most pleasant experience in a low sports car. Having "normal cars" at the moment, I'd almost forgotten what it feels like to be below, well, everything, but I was quickly reacquainted with the sensation that I'd known before with a few of my prior cars. To be specific, my old 1990 Nissan 300ZX and 2004 Mazda RX-8 had a similar feeling in traffic. My WRX was basically normal-car-height despite being lowered, and didn't suffer from this issue. I did not like this feeling, no sir, and in general the car field unwieldy and awkward in traffic. The transmission would start off the line in 2nd gear unless specifically told not to while in manual mode, and the steering was heavy yet without a quick ratio.
On the plus side, the exhaust did make a nice burble at low revs, and outward visibility was entirely unimpeded, even to the front. Confused? Because of my oddly-tall upper body and even-more-oddly large head I end up staring at the sun visor when in a Miata. I had no such problems with the 911's seat:windshield orientation, and found a very comfortable driving position behind the telescoping wheel.
Eventually, the road did open up. We crossed over into New Jersey and headed north on the Palisades Parkway towards Bear Mountain, and eventually wound up the twisty Perkins Memorial Drive to the lookout itself. Once out of the traffic the height of the car ceased to be an issue, and indeed didn't cross my mind any more. Instead, I was distracted by all the noises that car made. The dashboard would creak slightly, the right front wheelwell or mirror emitted an almost vocal wind noise at highway speeds, and something in the left rear quarter panel behind me would complain each time the car hit a pothole. Then there was the wind noise itself, whooshing away mightily and impeding conversation. It wasn't nearly as loud as, say, on a motorcycle at highway speed, but was loud enough that my wife and I quickly agreed that for our own future cars the wind noise and body rigidity compromises overshadow the ability to open up a patch of sky overhead. No convertibles for us, in other words.
Not all was horrible, of course: the car pulled reasonably well in 1st and 2nd gear, feeling nippier than my old RX-8 but certainly not nearly as violent as my now-deceased 297 wheel horsepower modified WRX; roll control was excellent; I didn't even come close to finding the limits of grip on any roundabout or tight bend; and gas mileage wasn't bad, with an observed 21+ mpg. The classic dashboard layout was also pleasing to the eye and easy to decipher, with the tachometer front and center, and, as I mentioned above, the driving position and visibility were both excellent.
The sports car and the modern driving experience
The problem is that these positive things--the bursts of acceleration, the feeling of hustling through a corner--were few and far between because of traffic. There always was a cop around the next bend (almost literally on the Palisades) or a slow-moving automobile, Harley rider, or spandex-clad road biker in the way. Yeah, yeah, it was a nice Sunday on Memorial Day weekend, sure, but the reality is that most driving is similar to this: one can only go as fast as the next car ahead, and roads that'd be entertaining at 8/10ths, legality aside, are quite boring at 2/10ths.
Besides being ugly due to its generation, cursed with a cheap-feeling interior in a horrible color scheme, and being an automatic, the car was hobbled by the real world. In a real world full of potholes, traffic, and other road users the Porsche just felt stupid. When I test drove a Lexus LS a few months back I mentioned how sliding behind its wheel made me feel like a million bucks. What I didn't mention is that part of that feeling was because it made me feel disconnected from the tumult and chaos outside the car, somehow superior to it all. In the Porsche, I didn't feel disconnected from the world outside, but instead felt each bump and heard the distinct timbre of road noise emanating from every other car on the road. Furthermore, when not driving like a hoon and just cruising along with the traffic the car didn't feel special at all, perhaps the biggest criticism of it of all.
Implications
I've always loved sports cars for the thrill they provide at the autocross, track, or on a favorite bit of road after midnight, but living with their compromises hasn't been a cakewalk. The 300ZX, with its dark tinted windows, was absolutely terrifying to back up at night. The WRX, with its coilovers and aftermarket center differential, struck a very poor compromise between ride comfort and handling, doing neither particularly well. The RX-8 was the best of the lot as an all-around package, but would have been better with 50 more horsepower, 5 more mpg, 2" more headroom, and without its unfortunate flooding "quirk."
Despite this, my inner 5 year-old boy has been telling me that I still should want a sports car. Why? To carve up a tasty, twisty road, of course. Well, that's what I set out to do with this Porsche today, and I have to say that it wasn't all that fun. The grins from the roundabouts, rare twisty bits without traffic, and onramps were more than offset by the ride quality, road noise, and cheap interior. What's more, I routinely ride my motorcycle on the same route that I drove today, and find doing so to be a much more engaging, visceral experience.
This brings me to my current dream car, the Nissan GT-R. It's a match in all regards except for price and prestige for the Porsche 911 Turbo, a much nicer and much more expensive version of the model of Porsche I drove today. It can corner so violently so as to cause Jeremy Clarkson's neck to seize up. It represents a high point in Japanese auto engineering achievement, and I take pride in that. It's something that I could afford in a few years, and I had convinced myself more or less that it's what I wanted--after all, what self-respecting boy would turn down a chance to actually fulfill his dream?
But would I have had more fun today had I been driving a GT-R instead of this admittedly flawed Porsche? Or would I have had more fun had I been on the motorcycle? More to the point, would I have had $90,000 worth of fun?
I think I know the answers to these questions, and I think it means that I'm officially an old man, older even than my father, who just bought himself that Corvette he always wanted. Yes, I think that I have outgrown my love of sports cars. Who would have thought a 29 year old could be past middle age already?
a buddy of mine gets his exotic rentals from Gotham. so far to date he's rented a Lambo Gallardo convertable, a Ferrari 599GTB and the Audi R8. i got to ride in the last 2 and liked both but the Audi gets the nod for being more of an everyday driver and a way more affordable price. not to say that a car over $100K is affordable but considering the Ferrari is over 3 times as much, you get the point.
I test rode a Triumph Speed Triple and a Daytona 675 today.
Speed Triple: Great engine, but riding position a little aggressive. The guys coming from sportbikes thought it was as comfortable as could be, but I, coming from the pseudo-dual sport, thought it was a bit hunched over.
Versys/Speed Triple riding position, for comparison:
Then, after a couple of hours wait (busy demo day!) in which I went hiking, I rode Triumph's race replica, the Daytona 675. If I thought the Speed Triple's positioning was a little aggressive, the Daytona was off the charts. Here's that same comparison:
I was not mentally comfortable in that position at all, with my neck all oddly extended just to see. It felt like riding in the drops on a road bike, and I'm usually a guy who rides on top of the hoods.
The engines on both of the bikes were great, even if very different in character. The 1050 mill in the Speed Triple is very smooth and torquey, and pulled smoothly even from 2000 rpm in 3rd gear. The 675 triple in the Daytona felt nothing like the 649 cc parallel twin in my Versys. Ok, maybe that's not quite true: it felt like my Versys down low but had an extra 5k revs to play with and just started singing up high. It was very nice.
On the other hand, I didn't like the rest of the Daytona that much, even aside from the riding position. Neutral was impossible to engage once the oil warmed up, the exhaust was a bit barky, and the clutch was hard to judge and juddered a bit on takeoff.
Today has made me realize that I don't want a sportbike after all. I felt stupid on it, I think I looked stupid, and I didn't feel comfortable or faster. Part of that is familiarity, sure, but the positioning just doesn't seem ergonomic. Even the Speed Triple's position might be a bit much for day to day commuting.
Back to square one.
Speed Triple: Great engine, but riding position a little aggressive. The guys coming from sportbikes thought it was as comfortable as could be, but I, coming from the pseudo-dual sport, thought it was a bit hunched over.
Versys/Speed Triple riding position, for comparison:
Then, after a couple of hours wait (busy demo day!) in which I went hiking, I rode Triumph's race replica, the Daytona 675. If I thought the Speed Triple's positioning was a little aggressive, the Daytona was off the charts. Here's that same comparison:
I was not mentally comfortable in that position at all, with my neck all oddly extended just to see. It felt like riding in the drops on a road bike, and I'm usually a guy who rides on top of the hoods.
The engines on both of the bikes were great, even if very different in character. The 1050 mill in the Speed Triple is very smooth and torquey, and pulled smoothly even from 2000 rpm in 3rd gear. The 675 triple in the Daytona felt nothing like the 649 cc parallel twin in my Versys. Ok, maybe that's not quite true: it felt like my Versys down low but had an extra 5k revs to play with and just started singing up high. It was very nice.
On the other hand, I didn't like the rest of the Daytona that much, even aside from the riding position. Neutral was impossible to engage once the oil warmed up, the exhaust was a bit barky, and the clutch was hard to judge and juddered a bit on takeoff.
Today has made me realize that I don't want a sportbike after all. I felt stupid on it, I think I looked stupid, and I didn't feel comfortable or faster. Part of that is familiarity, sure, but the positioning just doesn't seem ergonomic. Even the Speed Triple's position might be a bit much for day to day commuting.
Back to square one.
Notable vehicles spotted on the multi-hour journey to and from Jersey in traffic:
- Four douche-buddies weaving through traffic in their four Audi RS4s, no doubt on the way back from the Hamptons
- Two Lexus HS 250h sedans in Jersey. I have barely seen any in Long Island, let alone two, as they're slow sellers, I guess.
- Lexus LS 600h L. $120k hybrid. Hot. Driven by an old Jewish man with his wife in the passenger seat. He was stuck in the queue for the Verrazano bridge toll just like the rest of us, though.
- Chevy Sierra pickup in crew cab work-truck white guise, which is common enough except that this one was the extremely rare hybrid variant
- Four douche-buddies weaving through traffic in their four Audi RS4s, no doubt on the way back from the Hamptons
- Two Lexus HS 250h sedans in Jersey. I have barely seen any in Long Island, let alone two, as they're slow sellers, I guess.
- Lexus LS 600h L. $120k hybrid. Hot. Driven by an old Jewish man with his wife in the passenger seat. He was stuck in the queue for the Verrazano bridge toll just like the rest of us, though.
- Chevy Sierra pickup in crew cab work-truck white guise, which is common enough except that this one was the extremely rare hybrid variant
Of all bikes, I kind of like this one, the Ducati Diavel:
http://www.ducati.com/bikes/diavel/index.do
Riding position is between my Versys and a Speed Triple despite the cruiser-ish 240 section rear meat, and it has 162 hp along with nice suspension and brake bits and traction control/ABS to keep that power in check.
It's expensive, is quite ridiculously ugly from the front, is a naked bike for better or worse, and wouldn't take to a top case very well
but somehow I like it. The phenomenally positive reviews help its cause. Here's a good example:http://www.ashonbikes.com/content/ducati-diavel-0
Although I still don't quite see the appeal of driving a tall 4x4 on the street (see my test drive of the 4Runner a few months ago), if I end up in some western location with rough terrain close by then I totally want a little Unimog.
TTAC has a nice writeup on their history:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/06/going-where-no-car-has-gone-before-a-pictorial-history-of-the-unimog/
Although I loathe old vehicles in general for being headaches, it looks like going 25 years old or older to circumvent the DOT/EPA regs is the way to go:
http://www.unimogcentre.com/unimogfaq.html
That's too bad, since the new ones look ridiculously cool:
http://www2.mercedes-benz.co.uk/content/unitedkingdom/mpc/mpc_unitedkingdom_website/en/home_mpc/Unimog/home/unimog_overview/models/u_300_-_u_500.flash.html#chapter=1
This would make for a nice bugout vehicle and is apparently legal as it's in Wyoming at the moment, although unless I knew how to weld and how to fix it the concept is kind of lost: http://www.ki7xh.com/camper.htm
TTAC has a nice writeup on their history:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/06/going-where-no-car-has-gone-before-a-pictorial-history-of-the-unimog/
Although I loathe old vehicles in general for being headaches, it looks like going 25 years old or older to circumvent the DOT/EPA regs is the way to go:
http://www.unimogcentre.com/unimogfaq.html
That's too bad, since the new ones look ridiculously cool:
http://www2.mercedes-benz.co.uk/content/unitedkingdom/mpc/mpc_unitedkingdom_website/en/home_mpc/Unimog/home/unimog_overview/models/u_300_-_u_500.flash.html#chapter=1
This would make for a nice bugout vehicle and is apparently legal as it's in Wyoming at the moment, although unless I knew how to weld and how to fix it the concept is kind of lost: http://www.ki7xh.com/camper.htm
Last edited:
Reading about them more it seems like "little Unimog" is somewhat of a contradiction. The one to covet (while still remaining old enough to be legal) is the 435/U1300 series, it seems, and those are really, really big. Hmph. Scratch that thought. Pinzgauer, then? They also seem really big... Haflinger? Nevermind, scratch the whole idea.Although I still don't quite see the appeal of driving a tall 4x4 on the street (see my test drive of the 4Runner a few months ago), if I end up in some western location with rough terrain close by then I totally want a little Unimog.
(I'm on call/in house today from 8 AM-9 PM so have a computer handy and am somewhat bored, thus explaining this.)
Last edited:
The old man had a halflinger back in the 70's as a toy.... surprisingly small vehicles.
The pinzgauers I've seen around seem to be about the size of a large van? quite a lot smaller than the Unimogs at any rate, NZ army have been replacing their Landrovers with Pinzgauers, ugly as hell but look a lot more capable offroad.
The pinzgauers I've seen around seem to be about the size of a large van? quite a lot smaller than the Unimogs at any rate, NZ army have been replacing their Landrovers with Pinzgauers, ugly as hell but look a lot more capable offroad.
i was watching into unimogs a few months ago, when i was looking for the "ultimate" shuttle truck, at some point i even considered importing an ex-baja rolling chasis for shuttling duties...Reading about them more it seems like "little Unimog" is somewhat of a contradiction. The one to covet (while still remaining old enough to be legal) is the 435/U1300 series, it seems, and those are really, really big. Hmph. Scratch that thought. Pinzgauer, then? They also seem really big... Haflinger? Nevermind, scratch the whole idea.
(I'm on call/in house today from 8 AM-9 PM so have a computer handy and am somewhat bored, thus explaining this.)
spent 6 months, only to find a 35 years old rotted carcass for $12000 (wtf?) ex-peruvian army unimog....
discarded the idea because of the unicorn-ality of unimogs... they arent small at all. they are small trucks (and by truck i mean TRUCK, as in cargo/pallet trucks, not supersized unibodies called SUVs)
after discarding the idea of buying a 4runner (4.0L at $5/gal will kill my wallet) am in the market for a low mileage 2007-2009 mitsubishi l200, as my do-it-all car (basically for my 200 mile weekend shuttles into the mountains).
1 ton truck, common rail diesel, REAL 25mpg city, 30-35mpg highway, good offroad abilities.
will make a good candidate for the ultimate shuttle truck, once i install a bull bumper, horn/wiper controls at the co-driver´s feet, 6pt roll cage and fire extinguisher..
pd. the hilux is a hot car for thieves and too expensive to insure, and prices for well used ones are only 15%-20% below new ones!
Last edited:
I think I could find one, albeit at a higher price. The problem is that at a higher price they go straight into the category of "things that Toshi should rent instead of owning" alongside a conventional RV, pickup truck, boat, and small plane/helicopter if I get off my ass and get licensed in the future. This is especially true since the 25 year DOT exemption rule means that any 'mog would probably be a maintenance nightmare.
I'm crossposting this behemoth of a post from my blog so don't worry that I typed all of this just for you monkeys.
-------------------------
The safety-conscious Europeans have been performing a study on motorcycle safety, with the somewhat unwieldy name MAIDS (Motorcycle Accident In-Depth Study). Their full report is available on their website just for the inconvenience of registering. Below are some of the more relevant/interesting things that I saw on a quick pass through:
PTW rider = powered two-wheeler, ie, motorcycle rider. OV = other vehicle (ie, automobile) driver.
Note that the car driver is at fault in the majority of the cases! Also note that the majority of automobile driver failures lie in faulty perception. In other words, they didn't see the rider and his bike! This is why I wear high-viz clothing, have added extra retroreflective material, and why I run auxiliary lighting including a brake light flasher. If I can make myself seen then I've already cut out a large amount of risk inherent in riding.
Anti-lock braking systems
The next interesting section regards anti-lock braking systems (ABS), in particular whether they would have helped at all given how accidents actually happen. From the text, "62% of PTW riders attempted some form of collision avoidance, and 31% experienced some type of loss of control during the maneuver." Of the various forms of collision avoidance attempted, braking was performed 49.3% of the time, and swerving was attempted in 16.2% of cases. (These add up to more than 62% since they're not mutually exclusive.) Of the various ways to lose control while attempting collision avoidance, 16.2% of cases involved low-siding or high-siding while braking or cornering, presumably all of which can be attributed to locking up the brakes.
From the above one can see that there's a limited but definitely not null subset of riders whose bacon might have been saved by ABS. Is ABS a panacea to prevent all kinds of accidents? Certainly not, as it won't keep one from simply riding off the road (or into a fixed obstacle--more on this below) and won't keep drivers from not seeing a rider and turning in front of them. It could help in a substantial fraction of accidents-as-they-actually-occur-in-real-life, though, and that's enough to convince me that my next motorcycle should have it.
Immovable objects tend to remain immovable
Speaking of running into a fixed obstacle, there's this gem, also in the text: "Accidents involving a collision with a fixed object have an 8.1 times greater risk of involving a [scooter/moped] rider fatality when compared to a collision with a light passenger vehicle." This implies that getting run over by traffic, always a concern of mine, is much less of an actual issue than, say, splattering oneself on a tree or concrete overpass abutment.
Related to this is that 16% of riders were riding around a bend before their accident. While some of these riders may have been hit by a car exiting a driveway or the like, many of the resultant accidents in these cases were due to simple inability to stay between the painted lines on the road. Indeed, when looking only at single-vehicle accidents fully 23.4% are related to simply running off the road, with an additional 17.3% of high-side and low-side braking accidents also likely related to the improper cornering technique. Also relevant is that the MAIDS "data suggest that in general the impact speeds for single vehicle accidents were higher than for accidents that involved another vehicle."
These kinds of accidents--running into fixed objects, running off the road in curves or locking up the brakes after seeing an unanticipated curve, and crashing while riding solo at high rates of speed--are almost entirely preventable with prudence, proper training, and proper technique...
Does protective gear help?
I've heard it parroted that protective gear such as armored jackets, pants, boots, and gloves only serves to make a rider safer by virtue of changing his behavior. The MAIDS study attempted to directly address this, only looking at said gear's effect on minor injuries. (No one is claiming that wearing an armored jacket will keep you from breaking your forearm given a sufficient mechanism to do so, of course.)
This study showed quite definitively that helmets help. First off, "the use of a helmet neither increased nor decreased the rider's risk of being in an accident." Once in an accident the helmet is likely to help: while in 3.6% of cases it didn't have an effect on head injury, in 33.2% and 35.5% of cases it reduced or entirely prevented head injury, respectively. It's a bit sobering to note that 9% of helmets flew off the rider during the crash, both due to riders not using the chinstraps and due to their falling apart during the event.
Jackets also helped, preventing or reducing minor injury (ie, road rash--note that this road rash can and does lead to painful skin grafts!) in 64.6% of all cases. Similarly, riding pants helped, preventing or reducing minor injury in 61.3% of all cases. Analogous but slightly less impressive stats are also present for footwear and glove usage, which is common sense.
Does training help?
The numbers: "riders who have less than 6 months experience on any powered two-wheeler are more likely to be in an accident when compared to the riding population (7.8% of accident cases and 5.2% of [the control group] petrol station cases). As expected, riders with a great deal of riding experience on PTWs (ie, over 98 months) were found to be less likely to be be in a PTW accident when compared to the riding population (24.0% of accident cases and 46.7% of petrol station cases)."
What's more, the kinds of accidents that inexperienced riders get into are different: "The data indicates[sic] that riders with less experience are more likely to be identified as the primary contributing factor when compared to riders with more experience (47.2% versus 31.7%). [...] This suggests that riders with less experience are more likely to make decisions or maneuvers that result in an accident. This may also suggest that riders with less experience are not as skilled at identification of risk or at anticipation of dangerous situations."
While correlation doesn't equate to causation, there's definitely a link between experience and accident rates. If one makes the assumption that training substitutes in part for or equates to experience then, yes, training should help. The authors did attempt to look at training prevalence directly but concluded that they had insufficient data to come to any reliable conclusion.
Conclusions
Whew. That's a lot of numbers, enough to make even my eyes glaze over. Nevertheless, I think there are a few valuable conclusions that one can come to from having reviewed these data:
- Wear a helmet, preferably a full-face one, secure it properly, and wear proper riding attire if you don't desire a skin graft in the future
- Do everything in your power to make yourself visible to other drivers
- Avoid running into fixed objects or running off the outside of turns, +/- doing so while speeding
- Experience apparently begets wisdom, and rider training might have a similar effect, for whatever that's worth
- Consider choosing a motorcycle with ABS, but keep in mind that it'll only help in a subset of crash scenarios
-------------------------
The safety-conscious Europeans have been performing a study on motorcycle safety, with the somewhat unwieldy name MAIDS (Motorcycle Accident In-Depth Study). Their full report is available on their website just for the inconvenience of registering. Below are some of the more relevant/interesting things that I saw on a quick pass through:
PTW rider = powered two-wheeler, ie, motorcycle rider. OV = other vehicle (ie, automobile) driver.
Note that the car driver is at fault in the majority of the cases! Also note that the majority of automobile driver failures lie in faulty perception. In other words, they didn't see the rider and his bike! This is why I wear high-viz clothing, have added extra retroreflective material, and why I run auxiliary lighting including a brake light flasher. If I can make myself seen then I've already cut out a large amount of risk inherent in riding.
Anti-lock braking systems
The next interesting section regards anti-lock braking systems (ABS), in particular whether they would have helped at all given how accidents actually happen. From the text, "62% of PTW riders attempted some form of collision avoidance, and 31% experienced some type of loss of control during the maneuver." Of the various forms of collision avoidance attempted, braking was performed 49.3% of the time, and swerving was attempted in 16.2% of cases. (These add up to more than 62% since they're not mutually exclusive.) Of the various ways to lose control while attempting collision avoidance, 16.2% of cases involved low-siding or high-siding while braking or cornering, presumably all of which can be attributed to locking up the brakes.
From the above one can see that there's a limited but definitely not null subset of riders whose bacon might have been saved by ABS. Is ABS a panacea to prevent all kinds of accidents? Certainly not, as it won't keep one from simply riding off the road (or into a fixed obstacle--more on this below) and won't keep drivers from not seeing a rider and turning in front of them. It could help in a substantial fraction of accidents-as-they-actually-occur-in-real-life, though, and that's enough to convince me that my next motorcycle should have it.
Immovable objects tend to remain immovable
Speaking of running into a fixed obstacle, there's this gem, also in the text: "Accidents involving a collision with a fixed object have an 8.1 times greater risk of involving a [scooter/moped] rider fatality when compared to a collision with a light passenger vehicle." This implies that getting run over by traffic, always a concern of mine, is much less of an actual issue than, say, splattering oneself on a tree or concrete overpass abutment.
Related to this is that 16% of riders were riding around a bend before their accident. While some of these riders may have been hit by a car exiting a driveway or the like, many of the resultant accidents in these cases were due to simple inability to stay between the painted lines on the road. Indeed, when looking only at single-vehicle accidents fully 23.4% are related to simply running off the road, with an additional 17.3% of high-side and low-side braking accidents also likely related to the improper cornering technique. Also relevant is that the MAIDS "data suggest that in general the impact speeds for single vehicle accidents were higher than for accidents that involved another vehicle."
These kinds of accidents--running into fixed objects, running off the road in curves or locking up the brakes after seeing an unanticipated curve, and crashing while riding solo at high rates of speed--are almost entirely preventable with prudence, proper training, and proper technique...
Does protective gear help?
I've heard it parroted that protective gear such as armored jackets, pants, boots, and gloves only serves to make a rider safer by virtue of changing his behavior. The MAIDS study attempted to directly address this, only looking at said gear's effect on minor injuries. (No one is claiming that wearing an armored jacket will keep you from breaking your forearm given a sufficient mechanism to do so, of course.)
This study showed quite definitively that helmets help. First off, "the use of a helmet neither increased nor decreased the rider's risk of being in an accident." Once in an accident the helmet is likely to help: while in 3.6% of cases it didn't have an effect on head injury, in 33.2% and 35.5% of cases it reduced or entirely prevented head injury, respectively. It's a bit sobering to note that 9% of helmets flew off the rider during the crash, both due to riders not using the chinstraps and due to their falling apart during the event.
Jackets also helped, preventing or reducing minor injury (ie, road rash--note that this road rash can and does lead to painful skin grafts!) in 64.6% of all cases. Similarly, riding pants helped, preventing or reducing minor injury in 61.3% of all cases. Analogous but slightly less impressive stats are also present for footwear and glove usage, which is common sense.
Does training help?
The numbers: "riders who have less than 6 months experience on any powered two-wheeler are more likely to be in an accident when compared to the riding population (7.8% of accident cases and 5.2% of [the control group] petrol station cases). As expected, riders with a great deal of riding experience on PTWs (ie, over 98 months) were found to be less likely to be be in a PTW accident when compared to the riding population (24.0% of accident cases and 46.7% of petrol station cases)."
What's more, the kinds of accidents that inexperienced riders get into are different: "The data indicates[sic] that riders with less experience are more likely to be identified as the primary contributing factor when compared to riders with more experience (47.2% versus 31.7%). [...] This suggests that riders with less experience are more likely to make decisions or maneuvers that result in an accident. This may also suggest that riders with less experience are not as skilled at identification of risk or at anticipation of dangerous situations."
While correlation doesn't equate to causation, there's definitely a link between experience and accident rates. If one makes the assumption that training substitutes in part for or equates to experience then, yes, training should help. The authors did attempt to look at training prevalence directly but concluded that they had insufficient data to come to any reliable conclusion.
Conclusions
Whew. That's a lot of numbers, enough to make even my eyes glaze over. Nevertheless, I think there are a few valuable conclusions that one can come to from having reviewed these data:
- Wear a helmet, preferably a full-face one, secure it properly, and wear proper riding attire if you don't desire a skin graft in the future
- Do everything in your power to make yourself visible to other drivers
- Avoid running into fixed objects or running off the outside of turns, +/- doing so while speeding
- Experience apparently begets wisdom, and rider training might have a similar effect, for whatever that's worth
- Consider choosing a motorcycle with ABS, but keep in mind that it'll only help in a subset of crash scenarios
Last edited:
Summer 2013 replacement motorcycle possibilities:
Now that I have a bit clearer idea of my goals for my next motorcycle I thought I'd look through the options on the US market and see what might fit. What I want, to recap:
- Something that excites me (so no Deauville or even Wee-Strom, for instance, on these grounds)
- ABS (so no Street Triple or US-market Kawasaki Z1000, for example)
- Upright ergos, at the very least no more aggressive than a Speed Triple
- Good quality suspension bits (I'm looking at the Strom here)
- Practicality, namely the capability to take a least a top box if not hard bags (so the Speed Triple or Diavel are out)
- Not a huge bitch in size or weight (examples of huge bikes: Concours, FJR, BMW K sport-touring bikes)
- Lower seat height than my Versys, or at least the same (high bikes include the Hypermotard and KTMs, in particular)
- More power to weight than my Versys, or at least the same
Bikes that I thought might be promising, spotted while thumbing through cycle-ergo.com:
BMW R 1200 R. Yes, luggage is available even though it's a naked bike. The RT variant would address the potential wind protection issues, but the RT looks so heavy-jowled, obese even.
Yamaha Super Ténéré. Probably would make for a very comfortable commuter, and has traction control, ABS, hard luggage, a windscreen and all that jazz. Given that I don't ride off-road, though, it kind of seems ridiculous. As a side note, the BMW R 1200 GS totally doesn't appeal to me while the S10 does. This probably is because of the social stigma that I attach to BMW GS bikes, sort of akin to the stigma I attach to BMW cars.
It's odd to see a marketplace so filled with motorcycles yet the vast majority of them aren't ones that I'd want to ride for various and sundry reasons
Now that I have a bit clearer idea of my goals for my next motorcycle I thought I'd look through the options on the US market and see what might fit. What I want, to recap:
- Something that excites me (so no Deauville or even Wee-Strom, for instance, on these grounds)
- ABS (so no Street Triple or US-market Kawasaki Z1000, for example)
- Upright ergos, at the very least no more aggressive than a Speed Triple
- Good quality suspension bits (I'm looking at the Strom here)
- Practicality, namely the capability to take a least a top box if not hard bags (so the Speed Triple or Diavel are out)
- Not a huge bitch in size or weight (examples of huge bikes: Concours, FJR, BMW K sport-touring bikes)
- Lower seat height than my Versys, or at least the same (high bikes include the Hypermotard and KTMs, in particular)
- More power to weight than my Versys, or at least the same
Bikes that I thought might be promising, spotted while thumbing through cycle-ergo.com:
BMW R 1200 R. Yes, luggage is available even though it's a naked bike. The RT variant would address the potential wind protection issues, but the RT looks so heavy-jowled, obese even.
Yamaha Super Ténéré. Probably would make for a very comfortable commuter, and has traction control, ABS, hard luggage, a windscreen and all that jazz. Given that I don't ride off-road, though, it kind of seems ridiculous. As a side note, the BMW R 1200 GS totally doesn't appeal to me while the S10 does. This probably is because of the social stigma that I attach to BMW GS bikes, sort of akin to the stigma I attach to BMW cars.
It's odd to see a marketplace so filled with motorcycles yet the vast majority of them aren't ones that I'd want to ride for various and sundry reasons
I'm digging the look and sound of the R 1200 R as I read up more about it. I just read the ADVrider thread on the 2011s with the new DOHC heads, and such a 2011+ model in red with 2 years of depreciation knocked off the pricetag seems like it would be quite nice
I'll be going to a BMW demo day in August so will get to see if my perceptions line up with reality or not.
For future reference here is a SHAD top case mount: http://www.shad.es/en/shad-usa/products/fittings/bmw/r1200r/2011/c12mar12mod400mot2603/ . With that, I could sell my Versys with the rack but not the top case, and then move my pre-uglified/pre-reflectorized top case to the BMW! (Same deal holds for the 2011 R or RT variants.)
Bicycle-related content for once:
After reading this recent NYTimes article and noting that I, indeed, have experienced the "numb junk" with the current seat on my bicycle I'm contemplating trying one of the "noseless saddles" mentioned therein.
On one hand, I've read the reports from Specialized and other saddle makers touting the junk-friendliness of their saddles. On the other hand, a lot of these products look like unrefined crap designed for American cows on super-upright hybrids. On the other other hand (third leg?!), I never had any numbness issues with my ancient WTB SST saddles on my pre-move bicycles. My current saddle is whatever comes stock on my Jamis Durango 29er.
Thoughts from the peanut gallery? The one that I'm thinking of in particular is the ISM Sport: http://www.ismseat.com/products_sport.htm
After reading this recent NYTimes article and noting that I, indeed, have experienced the "numb junk" with the current seat on my bicycle I'm contemplating trying one of the "noseless saddles" mentioned therein.
On one hand, I've read the reports from Specialized and other saddle makers touting the junk-friendliness of their saddles. On the other hand, a lot of these products look like unrefined crap designed for American cows on super-upright hybrids. On the other other hand (third leg?!), I never had any numbness issues with my ancient WTB SST saddles on my pre-move bicycles. My current saddle is whatever comes stock on my Jamis Durango 29er.
Thoughts from the peanut gallery? The one that I'm thinking of in particular is the ISM Sport: http://www.ismseat.com/products_sport.htm
In case anyone is following along, I took the plunge and ordered not the ISM above but rather a Spongy Wonder: http://www.spongywonder.com/
No nose at all. I'll report back on how it affects bike handling once it's in place. I ended up choosing this particular one because it has different models to be chosen from based on rider weight and riding style, and because it's a product both designed and made in Canada. Oh, and it has a 50 day return period.
Well, my experience with those ISM saddles, based solely on diagnostic rides of customers bikes that have them, is that they're about as uncomfortable as as anything I've ever tried. YMMV of course.
I will say that position and tilt have a lot to do with saddle comfort. It's worth noting that people who are having junk problems are prone to moving the nose down and the seat forward which is usually exactly wrong. With the seat back and the nose slightly up, a) there's a larger rearward component to the reaction force on your feet from the pedals, which helps push you off the nose and relieves pressure there and b) gravity does some more of the same, or at least isn't sliding you back onto the nose as it would be if it were dropped a bit.
Also, if you liked the SST, try a WTB Rocket. The SST was my favorite until that came out.
I will say that position and tilt have a lot to do with saddle comfort. It's worth noting that people who are having junk problems are prone to moving the nose down and the seat forward which is usually exactly wrong. With the seat back and the nose slightly up, a) there's a larger rearward component to the reaction force on your feet from the pedals, which helps push you off the nose and relieves pressure there and b) gravity does some more of the same, or at least isn't sliding you back onto the nose as it would be if it were dropped a bit.
Also, if you liked the SST, try a WTB Rocket. The SST was my favorite until that came out.
toshi, if you decide to sell your bike... post it here!
depending on my wallet´s health then, there is a small chance i might call dibs, and have it shipped to miami, so no intl shipping hassle for you.
depending on my wallet´s health then, there is a small chance i might call dibs, and have it shipped to miami, so no intl shipping hassle for you.
The Versys is in the shop. It stranded me on the parkway this evening, thankfully 50 feet from a covered closed toll booth complex since it was raining like the dickens. My wife came out with a can of gas so it wasn't as simple as that, and it was showing 1/6 bars of fuel anyway (at least 1 gallon out of 5). I'm thinking bad battery.
Symptoms: the instruments went dark and the bike stalled with the clutch in while coming to a stop. Then it wouldn't even light the dashboard for a few minutes and then would light the dash but not turn over fully.
The battery probably was made in 2006 since the bike was put together in 2007 so it is a bit old, but I still didn't expect this since the bike is either ridden daily or on the battery tender these days. Hmph.
Symptoms: the instruments went dark and the bike stalled with the clutch in while coming to a stop. Then it wouldn't even light the dashboard for a few minutes and then would light the dash but not turn over fully.
The battery probably was made in 2006 since the bike was put together in 2007 so it is a bit old, but I still didn't expect this since the bike is either ridden daily or on the battery tender these days. Hmph.
Batteries in my Suzuki SV650 were only good for about 10 months of riding. I spent hours diagnosing electrical systems only to replace multiple bad batteries. From what I understand not a unique story. I think pressure to build lighter and lighter motorcycle have forced some manufacturers to under-size their batteries. A bad battery should become apparent with slow starts eventually leading to non starts, not being stranded on the side of the road. Unfortunately a modern moto with fuel injection is nearly impossible to push start. My first bike went months with a dead battery, it just required a short sprint at the beginning of every ride. Parking at the top of a hill was preferable.
Bummer..... At least a battery is a cheap fix.
The new battery is in my paws, via Wal-mart. I just added the electrolyte and am letting it soak into the glass mat for half an hour before charging. By early afternoon it should be good to go and I can head to the dealer with it, tools, and riding gear in hand. Worst case is that I replace the battery and it still doesn't work, which still would be worthwhile since the dealer would probably try that (and charge richly for it) anyway.
< $60 out the door for a OEM-sized AGM battery including core fee. Not bad--that's mail-order pricing for no doubt similar Taiwan/China sourced products, only I could pick it up locally.
< $60 out the door for a OEM-sized AGM battery including core fee. Not bad--that's mail-order pricing for no doubt similar Taiwan/China sourced products, only I could pick it up locally.
Mystery solved: bad battery and a bad stator. Explains why it wouldn't start up after the fact _and_ why it died in the first place. 2 points to Westy.
Estimate is ~$375 for the stator and installation. They'll install the Walmart battery that I brought in for free. Given that the stator itself runs $290 + shipping from cheapcycleparts.com I'm ok with that price.
Estimate is ~$375 for the stator and installation. They'll install the Walmart battery that I brought in for free. Given that the stator itself runs $290 + shipping from cheapcycleparts.com I'm ok with that price.
Last edited:
How did I miss the above tidbits before? Alexis, why must your co-driver operate the horn and the wipers with his (her?) feet to make it a good shuttle truck? Odd fetish of yours? Your fingers cramp up after too much riding and driving and can't operate the control stalks? Also, a roll cage? Are you going to shuttle while wearing your full-faces the whole time? Are you going to use the vehicle on the street at all? Hitting an unprotected skull on a cage, foam covering or not, is a great way to wreck your brain.
Sort of relevant to the above, and representing another warped side track from the same train of thought that led to Alexis wanting a roll cage and me wanting a Unimog
are these two threads of mine in which I lay out a case for owning and driving a 3-ton SUV, a Lexus LX 570 in particular:NASIOC short version, albeit with lots of replies and back and forth
Full length version on Endless-Sphere, an EV forum, where the less numerous reactions were a bit more polarized, shall we say
I love trolling people, especially when I kind of believe in my underlying reasoning.
Here's the OP from the NASIOC version of the thread with some OT-specific commentary elided:shikataganai said:I think I want a Lexus LX 570.
My reasoning:
- I don't care about MPG any more, and for any kind of expensive vehicle depreciation >> fuel costs anyway
- I also don't care about handling feel at the limit in a commuter vehicle, nor do I care how fast it gets around the 'Ring
- Mass equates to safety when all else is held constant, and this thing is MASSIVE plus has 10 airbags to boot
- I like reliability, lack of ostentation (e.g. Escalade or G-Wagen), and want a stodgy-styled vehicle with a low beltline for outward visibility's sake
- 4WD would be great for skiing and for very light trail exploration (no scratching that nice paint, of course!
- It has all sorts of toys like adaptive cruise control, fancy 3rd party stereo, and cooled seats that seemingly would be nice in a commuter vehicle
Any comments, besides "Have you considered a Marauder?" What say you, OT hive-mind?
maybe you should use a camouflage cover
the road up the andes, where most of my shuttling happens is usually very exposed single lane dirtroads.
if you drive "fast-ish", sometimes the steering wheel is at odd positions during corners, which make it hard to horn in time, or blip the wipers, which is crucial when driving around blind exposed single-lane corners. there might be other cars/cattle around the corner.
so this function is better served by horn/windshield switches at the co-driver´s feet. believe it or not, i considering this a major safety thing (if the word safety could be used in the same context of a heavy right foot on exposed roads, only to ride down even more exposed goatpaths on a bicycle).
ive had cars with roll cages before. even daily drivers. the cages were heavily padded though.
they are fairly common in peru, almost every work pick-up has one, mostly because of the very exposed roads. not that they will do much if you roll 1000ft down, but they help if you roll over into a ditch or something like that.
people in the front seats have no issues with rollcages. tall people in the rear seat of pickup traucks usually have issues. it isnt unusual for tall guys in the rear seats to shuttle with helmets on. besides, the rear seat on my cars have been very rarely used to accomodate people.
go for it.Sort of relevant to the above, and representing another warped side track from the same train of thought that led to Alexis wanting a roll cage and me wanting a Unimog
a client of mine has one of those, and its freaking awesome.
Last edited: