Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > MO Reader Feedback

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-07-2001, 06:13 AM   #221
cruiz-euro
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 31
Default wrong wrong wrong

You did not invent the cruisers, they were invented in Europe. For this reason I have the sole rights to define on this thread what is a cruiser you morons . And by my definition the biggest trade mark of a cruiser is a good low end torque. Cruising is a low end job.



You can have two of seventies Honda 350CBs of which other is a sporty and other is a cruiser. Sporty has an engine tuned to revs and HP, the cruiser has a low end torque set up. This is the starting point in building a cruiser, and you don´t have to necessarily go any further.



The motor is the most substantial part of the equation - ape hangers, legs front, black leather and the rest is the superficial part. Unfortunately there are lot of airheads even among the bikers who can´t distinguish between the two.



Furthermore, the V-2 engine was invented and patended by a French guy (forgot his name) in the first decade of 1910´s. So all harleys are rip-offs of a frenchie. There you are.



cruiz-euro



cruiz-euro is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 11-07-2001, 12:17 PM   #222
CBR1000F
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 367
Default Re: wrong wrong wrong

You're actually PROUD that a frenchman invented the V-twin?



And we did too invent cruisers.
__________________
People are more violently opposed to fur than leather, because it\'s safer to harass rich women than bikers.
CBR1000F is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2001, 05:12 PM   #223
jamesohoh7
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 211
Default I think not.. you just dodged.

Preamble: You (CarsSuck) don't have to read any of this 'middle' part if time is of the essence... skip to the sentence that has 'MY POINT' in it to get the digest version.



O.k. dude, the entire crux of my 'side' of this discussion was to refute your claims that Harley was somehow the originator of the 'heavy, low standard'.. or whatever it was that you called it several posts back.. or really, the originators of anything related to the particular genre of 'cruiser', in a general sense. This was the post you started titled "A cruiser is a fake Harley". No one argues their specific engineering accomplishments... and I could give a flip. Every bike company that makes its own engines can make some claim to innovation as well. Your position (started in that post I refer to) seemed to be that you feel like every bike that has that same type of style is a COPY of a Harley.



I refute that... I believe that Harleys look like they do b/c they COPIED other bikes of their early time. They -had- to copy them, or they wouldn't SELL any damned bikes! I don't fault them for that, but you seem to not want to realize this point. You point out some details that are different w/fins and so on between old Harleys and old Indians... so what! Do they or do they both not look pretty much the same -overall-? Yes. Big whoop. Doesn't take any shine of of either brand for me. In my reply, I addressed that issue already.. the various stylistic details of these new 'fake' bikes also vary quite a lot if you care to look. I think you finally acknowledge this in one of your other posts.



If your 'bag' ain't fake cooling fins (worthlessness of them an issue still disputed, but I'll let you have that one just to end the nit-picking), so be it. I wish I had a picture of your GS, I'd bet I could find something.. some little stylistic element that adds NOTHING to functionality of the bike. Would you then take this thing off?.. whatever it is? b/c it offends your minimalistic, "every part must function!" mantra?



You seem to be of the school of 'FORM must always and forever follow function'. Hey, that's great... for the most part, I believe that too. And, to your kickstarter comments elsewhere, I agree... that's why I have two street 2-strokers... no fake parts I'm sure, so don't get started. They are both 'replica' bikes of GP race-bikes though.. so I guess that somehow makes them -fake- in your ultra-critical book.



But, sometimes... a little style element can make a bike... else, why the hell have -any- chrome parts?... Paint works as well as chrome... powder-paint works better. Is there any chrome on your GS?.. forget it, I'm sure there is. Sheesh... at some point, paint is really not necessary either... adds weight. Use bare metals that don't corrode, problem solved (yes, being a little facetious...).



Anyway man... MY POINT: Harley did not invent the look and feel they have now made so famous. Get over it. I know you aren't really a Harley guy... but defending them as some kind of originator and further.. to BASH other companies for doing -exactly- what Harley did (make bikes that look like competitors bikes in order to sell them) is hypocritical to the core. END OF MAIN POINT.



Postamble:



You can pick on 'fake' parts all you want... no skin off my nose. I disputed some of those claims b/c I find them baseless... but that ain't the main issue I've been trying to get across. However, I'll even spot you an issue of fakery that I don't think you've even pointed out.. though I admit that I haven't read ALL of your numerous posts... you missed the fake oil-tank-look side covers. They do serve a purpose though.. they cover up electrics. Would you suggest that these parts go uncovered?.. that's wreckless and stupid. Should the be made blocky and square to purposely avoid looking like a Harley?.. or rather, a bike with an oil-tank?... then it'd be ugly and no one would buy it... not very smart, eh? That half-rounded under-seat shape just kind of happens to be 'right' on a bike that's shaped like that... I guess that's why a Harley's oil-tank looks like that... b/c it -fits- that space... they couldn't find a better place to put it. I would suggest that the same holds true for any bike that puts electrics/other parts there that need covering.





jamesohoh7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2001, 10:14 PM   #224
CarsSuck
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 282
Default Re: The W650

I've kicked a 2 liter v twin. It's not that bad. The bad knees you hear about are from the motor kicking back, which also can ruin starters and really isn't a problem of compression, it's ignition advance. With modern electronics it'd be real easy to retard timing until some rpms register, eliminating kickback altogether. There are plenty of motors that don't have this problem without modern electronics. Also 4 cylinders are very easy to kick, even with high compression. The short stroke really helps. There's no modern motor that would be harder to kick than a harley anyway.
CarsSuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2001, 10:44 PM   #225
CarsSuck
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 282
Default You're refuting points I didn't make

or at least, wasn't trying to make. The whole copycat thing seems to have been read in from the title of a post. The bikes are made to be fake harleys, or fake indians, or whatever. Doesn't matter, my point was the FAKE part. The fact that I said the bike they're faking is a harley, is because most of them are specifically trying to mimic new harley models that don't look at all like harley's long gone american competition. Maybe the current HD is based on models that were influenced by models that were once copying someone else, but they're not fake anything. Yes there are items on my bike that aren't absolutely essential, although most of those have been removed. But they aren't FAKE anything, just little cosmetic covers and whatnot, stuff put there to cover things they felt should be covered up. No problem, easily removed. They're not things that are cast as part of the motor, and again, they're not fake anything. I don't care what they had to do to sell bikes, I'm not trying to pass blame. If I were trying to blame anyone, I'd blame stupid consumers. I'm simply pointing out that whatever the reason is, the result is cheesey stupid motorcycles, and that sucks.
CarsSuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2001, 03:50 AM   #226
jamesohoh7
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 211
Default Yes, you did...

W/out going into an entire dissection of your original comments, I refer to exhibit A:



"Softails count. Magnas don't, although the styling would make it kind of iffy if it weren't too ugly to actually look like a harley. If I put forward

controls on my GS1100, it does not become a cruiser. It's a standard. What else can you say a cruiser is but a fake harley? Some look like

choppers, and not all choppers are harleys. So you could say they're not so much fake harleys as they are fake choppers--except for the floorboard brigade. Fake fatbob tanks, big fenders, floorboards, and it's called a cruiser--definitely not trying to be a chopper. It's trying to be

an FL. Nope, they're fake harleys..."



Just about every sentiment or point in there is you saying that 'cruisers' are fake Harleys. You sum it up in the last quoted sentence even... which probably applies most to the Honda Shadow line, right?



The fact that a current 'fake Harley' doesn't look like a 1911 Indian (or whatever) should be patently obvious to anyone... though Kawi does make those Indian 'copies' from a later generation of Indians. So what!



One question: If Honda/Kawi/etc... were around and had come out with their cruisers in the 1920's or there-abouts...would they still be 'copies' of a Harley/Indian/etc???... does the time-factor make a difference to you, why?... what difference does a similarly-styled bike that came out a handfull of years after another (Harley --> Indian) or 80 years after another make... or is it simply the -style- or general configuration of the motorcycle that bugs you?



-That- is all I am disputing for the most part.



You launched into the 'fake-parts' thing b/c of someone else's post. Like I said in my last post... I don't give a flip if fake fins offend you. I think they are there for stylistic reasons primarily, and arguably some function... every bike has some foofery on it, get over it.



jamesohoh7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2001, 09:42 AM   #227
CarsSuck
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 282
Default Like I said in the part you just quoted...

...to summarize it maybe a bit more clearly: It can be a fake chopper, (which has nothing to do with harley necessarilly), or fake harley--either way it comes out a cruiser. The common bond is they're both fake. Choppers and "big bikes" such as FLs are very different, even opposed to each other, yet we call pretend versions of either one a "cruiser". The Vulcans were the ones I was mainly pointing out as specifically being fake FLs (specifically evos, even), not shadows. Shadows are just as bad in their own way though, they just don't mimic a specific model, so much as drench themselves in all the fakeness of a kid's bicycle with "real motorcycle sound". I've really enjoyed your technicality-oriented approach in trying to convince me of the motorcycle industry equivalent of the earth being flat, but arguing this feels like some sort of debating exercise. I have no desire to try to prove what the owners of these machines must already know, I just want to point out that it's lame. What's every happy cruiser rider almost guaranteed to say about their bike at some point? Something about how "most people can't even tell it's not a harley". The funny part is how so many japanese cruiser riders and supporters bash harleys. Me, I don't really like harleys all that much, which is why I despise japanese cruisers. See, that makes sense.
CarsSuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2001, 11:14 AM   #228
cruiz-euro
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 31
Default Harley is only a copy of a french design

>You're actually PROUD that a frenchman invented

>the V-twin?



I have nothing to do with this invention. I´m only stating a fact. In these times when everything is labelled as a harley copy, and japanese are nothing but damn copiers, it is healthy to remember that harley is only a copy of a french design.



cruiz-euro
cruiz-euro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2001, 11:34 AM   #229
cruiz-euro
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 31
Default Re: What is a cruiser?

Well, if Schumacher drives a Fiat Uno, that does not a sport car make. How a car is driven does obviously not change its charasteristics (unless its wrapped around a lamp post that is).



To your other point: you can have a 250 cruiser or 250 sportsbike, depending if the engine has low end grunt or high revving power.



As what comes to my Royal Star, let´s suppose I change the pegs (plates actually) one foot backward and hey presto, its still a cruiser. But I change the engine tune so that it has 14,000 red line, high power and all the torque up there, IT CEASES TO BE A CRUISER.



Why? Because if you spin the engine at high revs it is not cruising. Cruiser needs the kick at the low revs.



cruiz-euro

cruiz-euro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2001, 06:11 PM   #230
max-9
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 13
Default Re: 2001 Power Cruisers Reader Feedback

HEY please enough .i really dont like to think of my v-max as a "cruiser " or "power cruiser " . the v-max has been a unique motorcycle that suddenly after 15 years seems to have become a benchmark for the new hybrid harleyporschecycles . although the v-max is a classic and a legend it has never been a great selling bike ,most dealers say they only sell 1 or 2 a year. so why did harleyporschecycle decide to make a bike similar to the v-max ?,but make it slower ,uglier ,and oh charge at least 2 or 3 times the price of the v-max.

and now that harley is part jap and part german will dudes still think its the american bike?
max-9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off