The lies They tell us

[onearmedbandit]

each to their own i guess.

i kinda like the feeling of a warn fuzzy pressed up against me................

I get that in the sack when I want it. When I'm out on the road attacking the hills I like to be in control of just myself and the bike.

[F5 Dave]

[plans trip to Auckland]

or maybe I should see if Stu has a demo I can ride.

Ahh, other things to worry about till after Christmas, but cheers for the ideas, may well check it out once things are settled (like setting up me garage & finishing a race bike for end of year).

Hmm, if I sold both road bikes maybe I could get that DT230 for an adventure bike. . .

[idleidolidyll]

what about the whale? what will she do for a beer?

don't ask me, i'm a grandad remember. i've just had my nap.
besides, my peckers for pissing through these days

[Swoop]

what about the whale? what will she do for a beer?

Greenpeace frown on people who get whales drunk.
Their blowholes get filled with saliva, and they are gone for hours when they need to take a piss.

[onearmedbandit]

Back to the original topic. I for one don't buy a bike because it's 2hp better than its counterparts, or 3kg lighter, like I'd notice the difference. And that would be the same for 99% of the riders here, they wouldn't notice the difference. Sure different power deliveries will be obvious, but that ain't got fuk all to do with max. hp. At the end of the day I buy a bike I like to ride, not because it's got more power or less weight then it's competition.

How often do you spend at 100% throttle anyway? How often would 2kg's weight difference make a huge difference around the track on an open day or the trip over the hill?

My point is that I don't make my buying decisions based solely on numbers. Sure, they are of interest, but there is a lot more that comes into it as well. Read any bike rag and that'll give you an idea on whether bike x is considerably heavier or under powered compared to bike y. So they can tell me lies, I'll do my own research.

[F5 Dave]

Everyone keeps asking about the seat. I say it's designed for just what is intended: a nice, 40-mile ride, the last 27 of which is spent in a high-speed chase…

[idleidolidyll]

Back to the original topic. I for one don't buy a bike because it's 2hp better than its counterparts, or 3kg lighter, like I'd notice the difference. And that would be the same for 99% of the riders here, they wouldn't notice the difference. Sure different power deliveries will be obvious, but that ain't got fuk all to do with max. hp. At the end of the day I buy a bike I like to ride, not because it's got more power or less weight then it's competition.

How often do you spend at 100% throttle anyway? How often would 2kg's weight difference make a huge difference around the track on an open day or the trip over the hill?

My point is that I don't make my buying decisions based solely on numbers. Sure, they are of interest, but there is a lot more that comes into it as well. Read any bike rag and that'll give you an idea on whether bike x is considerably heavier or under powered compared to bike y.

but mate, we're not talkin 2 or 3 hp difference or a couple of kilos. We're talking 30 kilos and 20 hp.
as for the bike rags, they gush over claimed weights and hp too, well most of em do.
they play to their advertisers just like the media does.
it's about dollars, sales dollars and advertising dollars.
you're right though, there is more to it than hp and kilos and i've told you a few more reasons why i bought the 950SM; the grin factor and the pillion capability.
the triumph 675 has a loverly motor and it'd smoke all the jap 600's in the real world with equal riders. however, the riding position is for midgets and the pillion capacity is a joke. after 20 seconds the missus was coplaining.

[idleidolidyll]

yep, i've got the optional 'comfort seat' on order and had one on the 640 too

[idleidolidyll]

[[
Originally Posted by Lifted from 'CYCLEWORLD' 950 SM test
Everyone keeps asking about the seat. I say it's designed for just what is intended: a nice, 40-mile ride, the last 27 of which is spent in a high-speed chase…]]

rode to rotovegas and back with the missus on the back this weekend gone.
the 'comfort seat' will please the missus as she did kinda complain a bit. The legroom's fine and so is space but that seat's gotta go. buggered if i know why ktm doesn't just fit the soft one std. oh well $250 aint too bad.

[onearmedbandit]

but mate, we're not talkin 2 or 3 hp difference or a couple of kilos. We're talking 30 kilos and 20 hp.
as for the bike rags, they gush over claimed weights and hp too, well most of em do.
they play to their advertisers just like the media does.
it's about dollars, sales dollars and advertising dollars.
you're right though, there is more to it than hp and kilos and i've told you a few more reasons why i bought the 950SM; the grin factor and the pillion capability.
the triumph 675 has a loverly motor and it'd smoke all the jap 600's in the real world with equal riders. however, the riding position is for midgets and the pillion capacity is a joke. after 20 seconds the missus was coplaining.

But the real world difference between them is probably fuck all, despite what the advertising says. And while the mags gush over power and weight figures, I've found them to be pretty honest in the actual reviews. What I'm trying to say is despite the lies etc, I'll do my own research before buying a bike if it mattered that much to me.

So yes I agree with you, the methods they use to tell us power and weight figures are dodgy, and not standardised even then. But if it mattered to me that much I'd do the research myself.

[idleidolidyll]

But the real world difference between them is probably fuck all, despite what the advertising says. And while the mags gush over power and weight figures, I've found them to be pretty honest in the actual reviews. What I'm trying to say is despite the lies etc, I'll do my own research before buying a bike if it mattered that much to me.

So yes I agree with you, the methods they use to tell us power and weight figures are dodgy, and not standardised even then. But if it mattered to me that much I'd do the research myself.

nah, the real world difference between the triumph and the japper 600's is BIG. that motor is WAYYYY torquier than any of them and so easy to use on the road.
On a jappa you'd be changing gear all the time but on the 675 ya just twist the wrist.
don't trust me though, ride one.
yes, i do my own research too but i start with what i've read and make a shortlist of bikes to ride.
trouble is, the bullshit they write just wastes my time. it's marketing masturbation and no use to any rider

[F5 Dave]

funny you should mention the 675, on my list of must try as well & is cheap enough I could keep the RF.


Bit concerned re the SM, the comfort seat is taller? I'm 5'9 so I don't want to be riding a ladder.

My GasGas seat can be hard going, could never make a roadbike.

[idleidolidyll]

funny you should mention the 675, on my list of must try as well & is cheap enough I could keep the RF.


Bit concerned re the SM, the comfort seat is taller? I'm 5'9 so I don't want to be riding a ladder.

My GasGas seat can be hard going, could never make a roadbike.

Oh dear, you're in trouble then.
I'm 6 ft and I can't flatfoot on both sides.

[Bend-it]

The RF is an awesome bike!! I can't figure out why it's so cheap!! I got mine, 38ooomiles, 1996, for $5k! 2 more 1997 and about 20 - 30+thou kms for about $7k... reliable, built on a detuned gsxr1100 bottom end, comfy for pillions, 135hp, 100Nm... hard to go wrong, really...

[idleidolidyll]

The RF is an awesome bike!! I can't figure out why it's so cheap!! I got mine, 38ooomiles, 1996, for $5k! 2 more 1997 and about 20 - 30+thou kms for about $7k... reliable, built on a detuned gsxr1100 bottom end, comfy for pillions, 135hp, 100Nm... hard to go wrong, really...

ummm, cause they're ugly?

don't pay me no never mind though, i'm riding a chookie on the road and it aint no MV Augusta or Britten in the looks dept