AviationBanter - View Single Post

**Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]** · March 8th 08, 02:48 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,alt.global-warming

Dan wrote in news:26c8c021-3ac3-48f6-837f-
:

On Mar 8, 4:08 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

What, to the 22 Raleigh? It has front suspension. A double acting
springer fork and nothing on the back, bu tit only does about 35. The
Mathcless isn't moine, it's a friends, but it is absolutely the best
handling thing i have ever ridden, including a fireblade.and a 998
duke.
The mathcless was a G12 and was very quick for it's day, but is very
tame by today's standards. It's so predictable, though, os sure
footed
and just such a pleasure to ride ( except for the vibes, of course)

One of the things we lost on or wheeled rockets is the perception of
speed -- Helmet, leathers, windscreen, etc all insulate the rider form
the road, to some degree.

Well, one of the guys at "Mad Sunday" during the Isle of Man TT a few
years ago decided to confront that problem head on by riding around the
course buck nekkid. When you ride around buck nekkid you do not want to
fall off. But he did. Eeep!
I wonder what his sensation of speed felt like!

I used to race road bicycles (my only claim to cycling fame is being
soundly beaten by Floyd Landis -- along with everyone else in that
race) and the feeling of speed at 45 MPH on a 22 lb steel bike running
20 mm tires is pretty close to 65 MPH on a motorcycle.

I'll bet! Lots more work though.

Of course helmets were mandatory in cycling, but they weren't full
face, etc etc. If you fell (which I did), it hurt -- alot. You always
had that sensation of being on the edge of doom (similar to usenet).

The oldest bike I've ridden was a 50's vintage British something or
other. I was young and unaware of the legendary names so I don't
remember which. But it was a bear to start, had a very narrow power
band, and let me feel every ridge on every pebble embedded on the
asphalt.

Well, that's a good thing!
The Brits built lots of bikes back then. It coulda been a Norton,
Triumph, BSA, Matchless, James, AJS, Vincent, Francis Barnett, Royal
Enfield or Ariel amongst dozens of others.

Lots of thier bikes from back then were hardtail or had some primitive
form of rear suspension like a sprung hub or "plunger" suspension. By
the mid fifties they all had swing arm rears and telescopic forks. I've
ridden a good few form that period and thought they handled just fine,
but The AJS and Matchless were both extraordinary by the early sixties
( they're pretty much the same bike) and the Nortons form this period
are supposed to be spectacular in their roadholding capability.

The 80's bikes from Japan were a quantum leap forward in all respects
(starting, continuing running, brakes, etc), but the "car like"
expereince intruded on the ride.

My last road bike I bought in 2001, and it is simply a screaming
machine. It hums along, continues to surprise me in the turns, and
sips gas. But I don't have a connection to it -- and don't ask me to
explain that.

I know exactly what you mean. It;'s why I prefer the older ones, faults
and all.

!!! I've never done 150 on a bike! My BMW will do about 110 and
that's
pushing it (also old) and that's fast enough for me. I have an old
Triumph 350 as well and I prefer to ride that on tight country roads
that rquire a lot of cog swapping. The brakes on it suck, though, so
you
have to be ahead of the game. The brakes on the Raleigh are almost
non-
existent, though.

Bertie

My next bike will likely be a beamer touring style. My wife likes to
ride along but the current ride isn't great two-up. I'll miss the 550
lb flickable ride, but -- ya gotta do what's right.

My BMW is a sprts version of the old airhead 7 series. It's a high
compression 800 so it's quick enough, but it's really nice to ride. It
has some handling quirks, but once you ride it with some verve it
responds very well. It feels really substantial yet it's light and you
can feel every nut and bolt clicking in perfect harmony as you rail
along.

Bertie