High Tech vs. Low Tech

 

On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 08:59:58 -0800, "Jerry Houston"
....


Aye.  "Smooth," "quiet," and "powerful" mean less to me than cheap,
simple, and easy to maintain.   Which is why I ride a Thumper.  I do
not ever intend on seeing the dealer.  Which, IMO, is why they promote
the expensive to build, buy and maintain multi-cylinder liquid cooled
fuel injected motorcycles.  My bike is a tool, not a toy.

 

On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 23:34:03 GMT, ls650@sbcglobal.net
(Paladin) wrote:


Most bikes are toys.  8^)  They are designed, built, and marketed for
that purpose.

I think there's an argument to be made for both sides.  I have a Honda
ST1100 and an old BMW 'airhead'.  The ST is smooth, comfortable, nice
for long long trips.  It has more power than I can use and the power
band is so wide it doesn't really care what gear it's in.  The Beemer
has tons of 'character' and gets me into conversations at gas stations
and places where bikers congregate.  But compared to the ST it's kind
of a beast, ill-mannered and crotchety, and it requires some practice
and skill to get the best out of it.

It has about twice the HP of the Beemer but gets about the same gas
mileage. The ST is -much- heavier, and that was a problem at first but
only until I got used to it.  The Beemer is a lot more fun on a twisty
mountain road, but the ST is as good or better in the city, despite
its weight, because of its good manners.  The ST is a little harder to
park because I can't pull it backwards up a slight hill, as I can with
the Beemer.  This was a real problem until I learned that trick of
backing into a parking space at a 45-degree angle.

I'm guessing they both cost about the same to maintain, all in all.
The ST is more expensive to work on but needs work much less often.
If I had to pick one bike it would probably be the ST.  The ST is more
serious transportation; the Beemer, which I bought for serious
transportation 20 years ago, is a hobby at this point.

I guess my point is that modern bikes are more high-tech but also more
reliable, besides being smoother, quieter, better-handling, etc.

Harleys are in a different category altogether. It's not -about-
reliability or smoothness or high-tech vs. low-tech or ease/cost of
maintenance.  Harley can't just decide to come out with a water-cooled
shaft-drive V-4 next year.  They can make improvements but the bike
has to -look- like a Harley.  OTOH they don't really 'compete' as the
Japanese bikes do, because people who want a Harley wouldn't be
satisfied with anything else.

 

Yes, but is the Beemer LOUD? ;-)

 

wrote:


LOL!  You know, it's funny.  In its day the Beemer was considered
unnaturally quiet.  They used to make jokes about  how it sounded like
a sewing machine.  But compared to the ST it's really loud!  The ST
makes no exhaust noise at all, the loudest sound you hear is
transmission whine.

 

On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 12:29:39 -0800 If you fall from a tree,leave your
anger on the branch and then  blazing laser <none> sent this :


Hmmm...I disagree on so many levels.

I think you should take the time to read here,
http://www.virtualschool.edu/mon/Quality/PirsigZen/

Please don't take this an afront,merely a possible different
perspective.

"Having built the engine that I ride in my bike I could swear,
sometimes,that the pistons I've had in my hands in the old V-twin feel
like they are on the ends of my bars balancing my corners".

Shep©



--
Free Windows/PC help,
http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/trouble.html
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID ˆ558