dhk@hp-pcd.UUCP (05/12/84)
I know I am not going to be the only one to say this but...
check out the Honda 500 Interceptor.
Dustin Kassman
!hplabs!hp-pcd!dhkdarryl@ism780.UUCP (05/18/84)
#R:sun:-108800:ism780:15800009:000:2174 ism780!darryl May 17 08:44:00 1984 I own a 1982 BMW R65 and currently have 42k on the odo (it's 2 years old today!). I am VERY happy with the bike. I commute daily to work (~22 miles one way) and enjoy long day rides on the weekends. Although the sheer power of the bike is less than enthralling, it's light, low-placed weight allows me to keep up with most people in the twisties. (It is my experience that most people only know how to twist the grip... how else could I keep up with bikes that have 1/2 to 3/4 more horsepower? I don't claim to be a racer, but the MSF better biker course has shown me a better way to turn-the best deal I ever got for $35). I have my dealer do all of the maintenance work. Although this isn't cheap, I have noticed that they charge LESS for their time than many of the Japanese dealers in the area. The only thing I have been able to use my 3-year unlimited miles warranty on is an oil pressure sender that started leaking. Disappointments: in 1980, BMW changed the seat. It is heavily sculptured to look neat, but after a couple hours I HAVE GOTTA GET OFF. Also, the usual complaints about the hairbrained sidestand (I replaced mine with a Brown Motor Works [Pomona, CA] sidestand that works like a real sidestand ought to). About the Moto Guzzi V50. I think I read somewhere that they have discontinued the V50 in favor of the V65. A friend has a 1981 V50 III. His bike is to mine as mine is to a 750, as far as weight goes. But he has had problems getting service for it (the usual Guzzi complaint, no dealers). He also had the standard points replaced with an after market electronic ignition (the V50 II's had electronic ignition, but some kind of supply problem made Guzzi switch back). As you can tell, I am a convinced Beemer fan. Buy one and catch the fever! ______ / \ _______| |_______ / | Darryl | \ ___/|________|Richman |________|\___ / | | | | | | ...!ima | | | | | | \ | | | \`|'/ | !ism780 | \`|'/ | | | | | | -( )- | !darryl | -( )- | | | | | | /| |\ | | /| |\ | | | \_______| |___ ___| |_______/ | | |________| | | `-' `-'
darryl@ism780.UUCP (05/20/84)
#R:sun:-108800:ism780:15800010:000:2919 ism780!darryl May 18 15:05:00 1984 ###### # ## # # ###### #### # # # # # # # ## ## # # # ## # # ##### # # # # ## # ##### # # # # # # # # ###### # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # ###### # # # # ###### #### # # # The age of the four has come and gone three times this century! Are you sure it's going to hang around this time? Raw horsepower has NOTHING to do with the tractability of a motorcycle. Anyone who buys a motorcycle for the 1/4 mile times either only rides a few weekends a year, or gets tired of the damn thing because its so much effort in traffic. That stiff clutch is fine for the dragstrip, but how long can you hold it in in rush hour traffic? In many aspects handling is at odds with speed, and the compromise that you make shows how you plan (or don't plan!) to ride. I have yet to understand why 120 horsepower is ANY better than 70--both will move you out of harm's way at about the same rate. (Some 70 hp bikes will do it faster than some 120 hp bikes, because more of their hp is available where you are likley to be cruising). Before you get any bike, ride it and see if it fits your style of riding! If you spend ALL of your time racing in the canyons, *maybe* you DO want to buy that rocket. But if you spend even *half* your time going between the canyons, consider things like riding position, the seat, handlebar shape, effort to turn, brake, and clutch, and even where the mirrors are! Do you want a fairing? Think about what you will want to, or HAVE to, change on the bike once you own it. Consider screen editors--how many changes do you have to make to emacs to make it do what you want? Does vi fit your editing style? Maybe (s)ed IS the right editor for some jobs. >>Ken, the age of the big thumper has come and gone, and if there is >>any intrinsic worth in the design, nobody is spending enough >>development money to find out. Lots of development money has been spent already on the big singles. They were the proving grounds for a great many ideas incorporated into multi's. They are cheap to care for, they DO have gobs of low end torque, and tend to be lighter than twins or fours. This makes them very good candidates for in-town commuting, even if they are unfashionable this year. Motorcyclists are supposed to be an independent crowd, but it seems that even the independent types are closet conformists. Darryl (I shift on the right!) Richman ...!cca!ima!ism780!darryl P.S.: Of course I own a single, and I have a great time on it. It's a 1967 Montgomery Wards Riverside 350. Fast enough for the freeways, but not much on acceleration. Sure it leaves a tingle when I get off, but then I know when to use it... And it only cost me $100.
marauder@fluke.UUCP (Bill Landsborough) (05/23/84)
I have to laugh at this article. Sounds like a 1967, $100 rated opinion to me. If finances or lack of need dictates that you will ride a Montgomery Wards Special then I stop right here and offer no criticism. But to violently attack powerful and agile performance motorcycles when you obviously haven't the foggyist idea what one is like is just plain stupid. You have never passed a car in your life and probably down shift to go over an overpass. You are a good canidate for a NERDECTOMY! Bill Landsborough