Thumper Club Forum
Club House => Chatter => Topic started by: guest7 on June 22, 2009, 07:26:18 AM
-
New bikes aren't stylish and have no 'class'. In fact how many 'modern' japanese bikes (70s onwards) could be called stylish?
I drink with a bunch of guys who love their Harleys and one thing always strikes me about their choppers and bobbers, they have pedigree and, as much as it pains me to say it, they have style. In comparision my beloved XBRs look cheap and throwaway.
Is my japanese single a 'real bike'? Will it ever be able to take its place alongside old Beemers, Ducatis and Brit iron?
And... should I care?
GC
-
What I find interesting about Harleys is the difference in the way their viewed by non-bikers and bikers. Most not bikers seem to think of them as proper motorbikes, where as bikers view them as crap motorbikes.
I suppose to some extent they look good from a distance - even I think the XR1200 thing looks the part - but in detail they can be very poor, built quality and reliability aren't great and dynamically they're terrible in comparison with most other bikes (including Japanese chop clones). Having said all that an 883 would suit my wife as she's a shortarse, does very little mileage, only in the dry and (most importantly) she's a woman. Unlike most Harley's it's also quite well priced.
If I lived in California I could see the sense in a Harley - little rain and no road-salt so less worries about corrosion, low speed limits, hot weather, straight roads etc. Up here in Scotland it'd be difficult to think of a worse bike for the type of riding I do (all weathers including winter, loads of twisty B-roads, long distances).
Even the XBR isn't great for some of the riding I do, but it's very good for some if it (local A & B road stuff, up to 150 miles or so).
Having said all that I couldn't really care less what others think of the bikes I own - as evidenced by me keeping the dynamically excellent but stylishly challenged Deauville for 10+ years!
-
Interesting topic. I was thinking about starting something similar after hanging about on the Newbonneville site. That lot live for adding fake 1960's bling to their bikes and their constant fiddling and moaning about things that go wrong has the potential to raise my blood pressure, but that's another topic. Anyhow, they talk a lot about the style of exhausts or indicators or whatever else they are messing with.
I have no idea what style is, I simply don't get it (insert comments about dress sense here ;D). People tell me the Bonneville is a style icon and similar which I don't mind, if it gives them pleasure so be it. Ones who want to waste their lives telling me Triumph copied a '67 Bonneville but used a '73 clutch cover I try (sometimes unsucessfully) to come away from with a touch of diplomacy. I find the ones who tell me it isn't real to simply weird. GC, I imagine there are plenty of such loons who'll always have some sort of hiarachy with a Vincent at the top, BMW's in the middle and the XBR down a bit but do you really care? We all know the majority of people in the world will vote for a Honda C90 as best bike, but there are always a few that will try and ignore straight numbers and rate their BM GS or Ducati as better. It's individual choice, there is no right answer. I think the mass of popular thought in the bike world is coming to accept the world didn't end when BSA went bust, but I can't say if the XBR will ever be on the list of must have bikes.
I saw a BMW R1200S or something yesterday. I thought it looked good. Why? Thinking about it, it looked lighter than most BM's, possibly because the rider was about 7 foot tall and should have been in South Africa helping sort the Springboks out. The idea of a nice flat twin in a light chassis appealed. If I had the cash i might go look at one, but would decide I didn't want eight indicator switches and a CAN networked sandwich toaster where the fuel tank should be before any cash changed hands.
When I look at a bike I think about how it'll ride and how I'll keep it doing what I want it to. I can't bring myself to worry about some abstract notion that a new Tenere looks like a grasshopper or chrome is somehow good. I look at a Harley and think "nice motor pity about the fork angle/bars/pegs". I look at the Bonneville and think it's a great substitute for an airhead BM that I can't get in the condition I want for the money I have.
GC, are you saying a round headlight, teardrop tanked, European style framed bike would be somehow better than the same spec achieved by a different route? I think modern bikes get the spec wrong (don't need 150 mph if that means having my knees near my ears), but if there was a market I'm sure they could get it right. I'm betting you might still not like the result?
Sorry Niblue, I'd take the Deauville over a Harley too, which I guess places you style wise alongside a bloke who rides in a flasher mac :-[ ;D
Andy
-
let's get a dose of reality - what is the most commonly recovered bike from Europe - the HD; or so told me the driver that collected my Bullet from Ireland. Let's not mention BMW gearboxes, or the centre bearing on the gooseneck of oilheads, or the broken frames. Let's ignore the tatty finish on Italian bikes or the electrics,or silencers which are rusty straight out of the box. No I think there are plenty of Jap bikes since the 70s which have style. (note I have not mentioned brit iron - best left that way) z650, GPZ900R, first fireblade, there are any number if you think about it.
Style is like happiness it cannot be bought - it just happens over time.
-
Style is what you're happy with.
I like my Beemer, to others its an old clunker.
I like Steffans Skorpion, to others its a "good winter bike".
I like Keiths W650, to some its "an old mans bike".
As Ogri said "Stuff everything, I've always got my bike".
-
Style - slippery subject. For my money a stylish bike has to be either:
a. Individual
2. The first to be copied
iii. Unpretentious
or
x. Just plain right to look at.
Examples:
a. - Individual - BMW R100RS, R90S
2. - The first - original 'Blade, BMW R80GS
iii. - Unpretentious - CD175, MZ250, Arfur the XBR
x. - Just right - Z650, coffin tank RDs, original LCs
Very few plastic shrouded crotch rockets make me go "Whoar!" - 2001(?) black & silver R1 being one of the few exceptions, probably in category x. - but I damn near dislocated a few vertebrae last week when an old duffer went by on a patinated (scruffy) Ariel Leader - see what I'm saying?
Am I just turning into an old fart? Would that explain the smell?
-
I like Keiths W650, to some its "an old mans bike".
Quite fancy one of those myself, to the extent I was thinking about maybe replacing the CBR with one. Does that make me old?
-
you're not Scots are you? ::)
Steffan
-
you're not Scots are you? ::)
I'm a mongrel.
-
you're not Scots are you? ::)
I'm a mongrel.
Aren't we all ?
-
To get (slightly) back on track...........
The W650 is a lovely machine. For my money (IMHO) it is better styled, as a tribute to the British style, than the modern Bonneville.
The Bonneville has a slightly frumpy appearance due to too large an engine and oddly bent exhausts whereas the old Bonie was much more sparse with lots of air visible twixt engine and frame.
The W650 nods towards Norton as well with its bevel shaft, has a mock Triumph engine cover on the wrong side and sometimes a sort of BSA power egg look on the other side. It goes well enough, is carbed rather than injected but is otherwise thorooughly modern in the electrical dept.
Anybody put a chair on one ?
-
The only downside I can see with the W650 is that it has developed somewhat of a cult following and that means that the prices are high for even early machines. When I wanted a bike for SWMBO (but which also had to be fun for me) the W650 was my first choice but it looks like it needs £2K+ to get one. Bought the XBR instead though, so it's not all bad!
My 2001 CBR is probably worth about the same as a reasonable W650 though, so I'm still thinking about it.
-
The Bonneville has a slightly frumpy appearance due to too large an engine and oddly bent exhausts whereas the old Bonie was much more sp******* with lots of air visible twixt engine and frame.
Anybody put a chair on one ?
Why would you want a smaller engine or a bigger frame? Better cooling?
The Bonneville exhausts are a PITA, you need to take off both silencers to get at the axle nuts. Can't remember if the W650 would have the same issue. It can be cured at the cost of a pair of aftermarket silencers.
When I looked at them, the Kawasaki's were hard to get hold of, were a fair bit down on power and had a drum rear brake which put me off. On the upside they have a kickstart.
I've seen one with a watsonian chair on.
Andy
-
Interesting subject, still pondering this one... I always think that when considering style, you first need to seperate it from fashion. The two are often confused(!) For me, something which is stylish may be fashionable, however in later years something which is fashionable will be simply quaint whereas a stylish item will still have "it"
To an extent form tends to follow function for many stylish items, but it is not quite that simple... the Spitfire (early marks only) is undoubtedly a stylish design, however when you look again it is quite an art deco design, look again at one and imagine it (or the Supermarine S6 which spawned it) in silver as a desk ornament and it's pure 20's (imho).
The "just right" mentioned by Pete is also a factor, and effectiveness in use also comes into play...
Returning to the original question(ish), the XBR will never be an all time classic, styling not *quite* there, useability good, popularity fair... but it did nothing new, to be fair it's a good all rounder, verry good at many things, good at most but exceptional at none (and I like them!) therefore no, some will like them, good originals may become mildly collectable but they will never imho have that cachet of being stylish and instantly recognisable. Even to afficionados.
going to stop now as this is/has become rather unstructured rambling ::)
Blimey, if we're going to have "topic of the day" - in 500 words or less "discuss" I really must stop this train of thought rambling and start composing proper arguments :o :D
-
New bikes aren't stylish and have no 'class'. In fact how many 'modern' japanese bikes (70s onwards) could be called stylish?
I drink with a bunch of guys who love their Harleys and one thing always strikes me about their choppers and bobbers, they have pedigree and, as much as it pains me to say it, they have style. In comparision my beloved XBRs look cheap and throwaway.
Is my japanese single a 'real bike'? Will it ever be able to take its place alongside old Beemers, Ducatis and Brit iron?
Interesting. Regarding the ' style ' of modern Jap bikes, there are numerous bikes that spring to mind . 1000 Katana for a start, superb. 400/4 .You all know the soft spot I have for Xs11.Any Kawa triple IMHO.VFR 750 ,brilliant .I could just list numerous bikes ,but this is not what this is about .
Whether a bike has style is down to the individual who says it has.
As for the Harleys and their pedigree, well what's pedigree . A bike is the sum total of the work put into it and the end result reflects the style and likes/dislikes of the owner , regardless of the history of the marque. I've seen some awful Harleys , two wheeled tinsel trucks .But to their owner its what they want.Who am I to 'dis ' his ride simply because it does not appeal to my sense of style .
Your XBR may look cheap and throwaway , because that is what they are designed to be . Mass produced for a market which on the whole bins things in favour of the next new thing .The difference here is that the XBR , along with most of the bike jap singles, appeal to the enthusiast . I would happily find space for a Sr500 or xT 500 any day of the week .
My Bonnie falls into the same niche as the Harley.A modern take on an old idea.Built like that because it will sell to people who want a traditional looking Triumph . The enjoyment I had on mine over the weekend was priceless .Fine weather , great roads and a superb sound from the aftermarket exhausts .Every time I got off the Bonnie , I turned to look back at it .My eyes were drawn to the tank badge,my Triumph . I agree it's not a '67 Bonnie {or TR6 for that matter },but it never will be. I can't afford the real thing,so until I can,my 2001 Bonnie will have to do .
Has it got style ? It has to me and that's all that matters .
-
Great topic and some good responses. Reading the posts has really got me thinking 'what is style?' Why do some things hit the right button to the majority, including those who don't understand the subject matter? This to me is closely linked to art. Some bikes are moving sculpture covered in art and producing music.
For me, stylish machines perform their function with minimum fuss, but maximum grace. All the separate elements are necessary to complete the task the machine is built for yet flow together to fool the mind into thinking they are as one.
The standard XBR doesn't quite do it, but some specials I've seen certainly do. Their owners have added the style by the close attention to the detail that a mass produced bike rarely gets.
-
Well, not mentioned....as usual.....the little srx....I love'em (as you know)....they trick up wonderfully.....easy to work on, robust, reliable, the best effort to come out of japan with a cradle frame (styled on the featherbed).....great little scratcher....i could go on....i love the quirky rev counter stuck out to one side.....the air cooled engine, .....the sexy kickstart......oh sh1t i am going on..
-
Style!?
Duke singles. 8) 8) 8)
Aermmachi racing singles. 8) 8)
Most Italian, racing double knocker up to 250cc singles factory bikes. 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)
Sally the SRX, wi' twin shocks. 8) Mono shock variant, if you must. :-\
Harleys, usually corpulant, corporate and chromed. :o However, once in a while something tasty comes along and you just know its 'Right'! 8) 8)
(http://i.ebayimg.com/14/!BTSJDGgBGk~$(KGrHgoH-DwEjlLlzbOWBKHpNhe~~_1.JPG)
(http://i.ebayimg.com/10/!BTSJdG!Bmk~$(KGrHgoH-C4EjlLlyhrPBKHpPi6y9g~~_12.JPG)
Not Sold on Ebay. Lot number:300321355421
It just 'Looks Right'.
Keep on boppin', Bill
-
Looks like a ' Hogbitz ' cafe job . Nice.
Rob .
-
I am a great lover of the old style ally tank on wheels cafe racer and so would expect to find it mmmmm, but it falls short, the tank and seat do not compliment each other and the bike above the tank-seat line clashes with the bike below the tank-seat line - IMHO
To me there are few poor Tritons, they are just so right - if I could get my Photobucket working I would post a pic of an Atlantic M/C Datona Triton that is to me just about perfect.
However this is possibly one of the few Tritons that do not work for me...
(http://www.zebra3uk.com/temp135.jpg)
R
-
YUK! :o
Maybe something like this would be more to your taste...
(http://motorbike-search-engine.co.uk/classic_bikes/norton_triton.jpg)
-
That is better - such nice proportions...
R
-
However this is possibly one of the few Tritons that do not work for me...
(http://www.zebra3uk.com/temp135.jpg)
R
Sorry Rog but it looks like a tweaked /hardtailed Commando frame to me with an SS50 tank . The motor looks like a Commando as well . Perhaps a sprinter ?
Rob .
-
Fair cop - I was googling for a very pretty red Triton and this turned up titled as a red Triton, looked no further than that, so it is not even a Triton - well at least the FB frame was not hacked - mind if it was a FB that had been damaged beyond reasonable repair than it would be a fine use.
This was the pic I was looking for
(http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w230/Shaftoflame/TritonDaytonaOriginal.jpg)
R
-
Brother has put a Hedingham sidecar on to his w650 and loves it. Only uses it for short trips with the kids tho'. I wonder if the tank capacity is large enough as it looks quite small.
Good thread this and has got me thinking. style what is it? looking at a lot of replies function is high up on the agenda for thumper club members but is that really style. After all if function was the main consideration would we have so many designs of bike.
On top of this I see a common thread of what we liked as a yufff. often looking throgh rose tinted glasses at past bikes forgetting their problems eg 1 cylinder 400/4's in the wet, non stopping disk brakes or worse still non stopping drum brakes.
I looked up some old bike mags from the 50's and some of the articles harked back to the "good old days" so this is not a new discussion.
Modern bikes I like them I ride everyday and the thought of old bikes with hight maintenance or poor reliability don't do owt for me. I work 6 days a week 10 hours a day so hours working on bikes is not an option.
Why is there a problem with plastic covering the bike for me it gives designers a chance to create individual designs. why do we have to see engines etc.
Is the reason because we grew up with bikes like this and this is how bikes should be.
It reminds me of my dad saying about led zepplin "no tune and you can't here the words" now I say the same to my kids about their music.
I don't ride at the limit puting my knee down, but I do like to have a well built bike which does the job I ask of it and looks good in my eyes.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, don't mock what we don't understand and don't make generalisations about different types of bikes and those that ride them. some of the greatest riders I know ride race bikes, hailwood, dunlop, toseland etc
Remember if everyone wanted a single they would be far more expensive and I for one couldn't afford to buy one.
enough said ride safe and enjoy lifes to short as it is.
beeman
-
Brother has put a Hedingham sidecar on to his w650 and loves it. Only uses it for short trips with the kids tho'. I wonder if the tank capacity is large enough as it looks quite small.
The Bonneville has you looking for petrol at 100 miles, on reserve at 140 and walking before 160. I can't recall picking out a larger tank/better range when looking at W650's.
That's another thing with style. There is space on the Bonneville for a 5 or 6 gallon tank, even with the larger section frame to support 60 HP. Now when the furthest most people rode was to pay their window tax at the nearest Roman garrison and their 30 HP Triumph did 60 mpg, I'm sure the 4 gallon/240mile/8 hour tank was fine. When the style people came to the 2002 Bonneville they kept the same proportions, stuck the big tube down the middle and brought a 3 gallon/120 mile/3 hour bike into a world where motorways make a 200 mile trip a decent afternoon on the road. With 60 HP, an extra 10kg of petrol isn't going to cause much hassle. Style over function. Isn't there a Harley with a 75 mile range? Can't look very stylish with a jerry can strapped on the back!
Andy
-
Fair cop - I was googling for a very pretty red Triton and this turned up titled as a red Triton, looked no further than that, so it is not even a Triton - well at least the FB frame was not hacked - mind if it was a FB that had been damaged beyond reasonable repair than it would be a fine use.
This was the pic I was looking for
(http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w230/Shaftoflame/TritonDaytonaOriginal.jpg)
R
Got that picture on the wall by my desk at work. Makes my grin inside to see it and keeps me working when all I want to do is quit!
-
Style be buggered >:(
Ride what you got and be happy ;D ;D
Steffan
-
(http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w230/Shaftoflame/TritonDaytonaOriginal.jpg)
Now *that's* the sort of tank, and indeed the style they couldn've used for the new Bonneville, probably would have managed to go between petrol stations with that! ;)
I have to say it's very, very nice going from a bike that hit reserve at 112 miles to one which does so as 190 odd miles... 8) Much easier and more practical ;D
-
My ratty old Triton had one of those big 5 gal tanks - used to be good for a weeks benefit cheque and about 250 to 300 miles but boy was the handling different full and on reserve!
Mind that red triton could be 'different' and thus more to my liking - I would have less rear mudguard and possibly a dinky set of lights tucked under the seat, and prolly brakes that worked at least on the front...
Someone mentioned the original LCs - 250 was nice but the 350 was near perfect, mine had a set of chrome Allspeeds which I really liked, mind a mate had a fully faired, ally tank etc from Mel Le Moto on his and that was mmmmmmmmmm
I think what I like is distinction - I know all Tritons are much of a muchness - mind I did see a pretty much standard Dommie with an Umph engine on the IoM some years ago, the bloke riding it had started to suffer with the cafe racer shape of his Triton so he clothed it in std seat, tank etc and had best of all worlds.
Tii many of the current crop look similar to each other - mind so did our crop. But then there are a few peaches, 916 mmm, Original Fireplace was good but common so tempered the feel of it. Back in my day (grumble mutter fart) the GS1000S was to me mmmmmm, the CB900 Hondas just missed. XT500 was mmmm XL, SP etc not quite there. Some of the RGV SUzukis have been near perfect - cannot remember what model, but later ones lost some. I thought the FJ1100 had more style than the GPz900R
It is all horses for courses, mind in my time I have ridden a Jawa 250, Kwak 250 triple, Honda CB200, CB250 Superdream (X4) a number of mongerels etc, none of them stylish, all of them good transport after a fashion.
R
-
I don't know about "style" so much, as most jap/asian machinery takes its designs from the Euro American leads. Proof, you want proof , look at the early Japanese Dreams and Calida's... fugly to the extreme. I think the issue should more related to a bikes character.
The old british metal was cantankerous, the American stagnated designs that could be easily personalised but always they had a character. The more you swore at it the more you loved it.
To make them run you would need to be a bush mechanic and knew every bolt and nut by name.
The Japanese stuff just starts and goes..and goes and goes. ho hum!
-
There is something in what you say mate. My Bullets cause me endless hassle but once they start and go all is forgiven. I have been at the point of getting rid of the pair but once we're thumping down the street, it is love all over again. Not many bikes have that................
Avagoodweekend all, off camping with the family
Steffan
-
Hmmmm to my mind almost anything can be fashionable but to be stylish it has to have some practicality.
Look at clothes, fashionable clothes often look impractical/dated, however it's often said that stylish clothes almost always remain fashionable, sometimes they may look archaic but most people will look at them and opine that they look good, and practical.
In the same way I think an SRX is stylish, I don't think it will attain the cachet of "a classic" ie. widespread acceptance as an exceptional design/bike, but I think if you pull up next to a group of people who haven't seen one a significant proportion of the group will agree it looks good, very few would say ugly.
By that definition the design and style hasn't dated and is broadly approved of and therefore I would class it as stylish rather than fashionable.
Carrying on the thought, a well set up Enfield can be stylish, it's practical and different enough to be individual without suffering from design elements inflicted to fit in with a fashion. An unreliable, leaky or badly set up Enfield however loses it's stylish cachet as it becomes unreliable and impractical...
Of course style is very much a personal perception, some might say Terry Thomas has style, some would call him a filthy minded letch, Steffen may protest he isn't stylish however choosing an army green Enfield (and standing out from the crowd that way) IS a style, whether chosen for practical reasons or not, will it do anything a CG125 will not for your chosen trip/s....?! ;)
(no offence meant, and I'd love a shot on it(!) it's just as an example mate)
Of course it may well be that you don't care what other people think of your individual stylishness or indeed lack of style, but every time you choose to buy one colour over another, or indeed one type of vehicle over another, we make a choice which is governed in part by style whether we conciously choose to or not.
If our motorcycles were purchased purely on practicalities we'd all be riding some sort of medium small semi(or fully) enclosed variant on a scooter, or with the current choice of machines either CG/YB125's or CB/GS/ETC 500's, the remainder being on Deauville's it being the only other currently available *practical* middleweight long distance bike I'm aware of on sale just now.
But they are not... hence diversity and a wide variety of views on what is stylish.
Which is probably a good thing, (even though I'm still writing in the train of thought style! ::)) ;) :D
-
Kurt mate, I think your getting style mixed up with character. All my bikes have had character, few were ever stylish :-[
-
Which is probably a good thing, (even though I'm still writing in the train of thought style! ::)) ;) :D
Indeed. One good thing about bikes is that they're relatively cheap to buy so it's quite reasonable to have a combination of practical and stylish. Until recently I had a Deauville (which is a great bike IMHO) for practical but also went through quite a range of other bikes that were more for fun/interest in parallel with it.
The main reason I've got an XBR is 'cause I loved the look & style of the thing when it came out mid-eighties and I was a teenager with a 125. Having just bought the CBF for practicality (replacing the Deauville) my next bike change will quite possibly be something interesting but less than practical (to replace the CBR) although at this juncture I've got no idea what it might be yet!