Yarra Ranges is Stuffed for Motorbikes
in [Aussie Motorcycles]
|
Prev: ROT IN HELL GREEK FUCKWIT....
Next: Garage Night new video: Suspension overhaul starts with Dremelon a lathe
From: Andrew on 8 Feb 2010 05:30 On Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:48:46 +1100, GWD wrote: > On Mon, 08 Feb 2010 08:03:07 GMT, Andrew wrote: > >>On Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:07:17 +1100, GWD wrote: >> >> >>> Well at the risk of curing Nev's insomnia even more, I think you have >>> given an excellent run-down on how Manufacturers see their products, >>> and from that point of view I agree with you. I would be interested in >>> an owner's definition of a sports bike, and which bikes fit that >>> category. As I see it, there are bikes that are enjoyable that go >>> fast, and others that just go fast. All are sold to mere mortals, a >>> lot of whom don't seem to know what they are getting themselves into >>> (count me in that group). What picture should be in my head when I'm >>> talking about a sports bike? >>> >>> -- >>> Regards >>> George De Lacey >> >>Orright, howsybout this? The more closely the 'sports bike' resembles >>whatever it is Valentino Rossi is racing these days, the more likely it >>is to be *real* sports bike. >> >>There ya go: a continuum. R1 at one end and HD at the other. Simple. > > I see. The criterion is simply faster is better. I think I'll stay with > my tractor. It's way faster than my skill level, and a pleasure to ride. > The fact that BMW sees it as 50:50 sports does nothing but confuse the > issue, IMHO. So you weren't paying attention when I excluded 'pretend' sports from the Japanese suppliers, and you somehow think BMW is exempt? -- Regards Andrew
From: Nev.. on 8 Feb 2010 06:06 Andrew wrote: > On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 15:02:24 +1100, Nev.. wrote: > >> Andrew wrote: >>> On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 10:06:44 +1100, G-S wrote: >>> >>>> Andrew wrote: >>>>> If you buy one, it is because you want those two things, or you want >>>>> people to think you want those two things. Either way, you're a hoon. >>>>> Even if you never do a wheelie on your litre-class sports bike, and >>>>> you always stick to speed limits, you're still a hoon. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I have to disagree with that. >>>> >>>> If a person never speeds, never wheelies, never breaks the law and >>>> rides a litre-class sports bike they are NOT a hoon. >>>> >>>> They no doubt want people to think they are a hoon (or the 2nd coming >>>> of M Doohan) but that doesn't make them one. >>>> >>>> At best they are FAIL at hoon... >>>> >>>> >>>> G-S >>> Would you settle for 'wannabe' hoon? Nobody buys a sports bike for its >>> touring capability, or its baggage handling, or its ground clearance. >>> The fact that the rider doesn't behave like a hoon doesn't alter the >>> motivation for the purchase. >> Most of my motivation for buying highpowered sports bikes has been being >> comfort and laziness. Whats going to happen is you're going to have to >> define sports bike and hoon to within a very narrow definition and the >> real world will trip you over with diversity. So lets start by defining >> 'sportsbike'. >> >> Nev.. >> '08 DL1000K8' > > OK. Let's start with 'The Most Sporting Bike Class Defined By The > Manufacturer'. For example, Kawasaki make bikes they classify as 'Sport' > and 'Supersport'. We take the 'Supersport' category and we get the ZX-6R > Ninja, the ZX-10R Ninja and the ZX-14. OK, Suzuki next. They have bikes > they classify as 'Sport / Sport Touring' and 'Supersport'. We take the > 'Supersport' category and we get the GSX-R600, the GSX-R750, the GSX- > R1000 and the Hayabusa. > > I'm happy with all of those (actually, I really would be). Want to try > Ducati? They have categories called 'SportClassic' and 'Superbike'. And > if you do the obvious and select 'Superbike', you get the 848, 1098R, > 1198 and 1198S. > > I could go on but I think Nev.. is snoring. Anyone interested in offering > a contradictory example? hmm... you've ignored a few 1300+cc 150+HP 260+kph machines which people do buy for their touring capabilities. Nev.. '08 DL1000K8
From: hippo on 8 Feb 2010 07:05 Nev.. wrote: > > G-S wrote: > > > But it would make certain that a candidate who didn't have the support > > of the most people wouldn't win (as the fundy I mentioned in another > > post managed). > > I have no idea what a fundy is, but tt sounds like the system is working > perfectly if unpopular candidates can't win. That's how democracy works. > > Nev.. > '08 DL1000K8 > > A BMW F650? :) -- Posted at www.usenet.com.au
From: G-S on 8 Feb 2010 15:28 Nev.. wrote: > G-S wrote: >> Nev.. wrote: >>> G-S wrote: >>>> Nev.. wrote: >>>>> G-S wrote: >>>>>> Nev.. wrote: >>>>>>> G-S wrote: >>>>>>>> Marts wrote: >>>>>>>>> G-S wrote... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I have private health care and so do all my family, I haven't >>>>>>>>>> used the public health system in over 20 years. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You would have. For example, every time you pulled out your >>>>>>>>> Medicare card. Or if >>>>>>>>> you're admitted to the ED, which is paid for by Medicare. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I haven't been to an emergency department in over 20 years. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The only times I've been in hospital in more than 20 years I've >>>>>>>> been in private hospital. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And the PBS for prescription drugs. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I actually am on regular prescriptions, plus aspirin. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> None of the prescriptions I am on are on the PBS (although there >>>>>>>> are less effective alternatives that are in the PBS list) and >>>>>>>> aspirin I buy over the counter. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Try again... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LOL. Are you naive enough to think that when you attend a >>>>>>> private hospital, they don't claim 100% of your Medicare >>>>>>> entitlement on your behalf? LOL. >>>>>> >>>>>> I never said the private hospital hadn't benefited from public >>>>>> health, I said I had not. >>>>> >>>>> And you can't see how the private hospital receiving money on your >>>>> behalf for services they provide to you, is to your benefit? Really? >>>>> >>>> >>>> I would use the private hospital no matter what the cost of that >>>> hospital to me. >>>> >>>> The government subsidizing those private hospitals reduces the cost >>>> to me of course, which means I receive a benefit from the private >>>> hospital subsidies. >>>> >>>> But the benefit I receive is less than (substantially less than) the >>>> tax that I pay (and that applies to the total of benefits that I >>>> receive). >>>> >>>> So the NET benefit is negative. >>> >>> Must be hard work shifting those goalposts around so much. ! >>> >>> Nev.. >>> '08 DL1000K8 >> >> Nope... I just hadn't defined them that closely before, but since you >> asked. >> >> Or are you trying to say that something that nets me a negative gain >> is a real benefit? >> >> Coz I don't see it... > > If you earn $1000 and pay it off your mortgage, you can't say that you > received no benefit from the money you earned, just because you never > had it in your hand to spend on other things. > I don't see what relevance that has, a mortgage payment is a positive gain (from a negative accounting position) but it's still a positive net gain. Not the same thing as a negative gain. G-S
From: Andrew on 8 Feb 2010 16:07
On Mon, 08 Feb 2010 22:06:12 +1100, Nev.. wrote: > Andrew wrote: >> >> OK. Let's start with 'The Most Sporting Bike Class Defined By The >> Manufacturer'. For example, Kawasaki make bikes they classify as >> 'Sport' and 'Supersport'. We take the 'Supersport' category and we get >> the ZX-6R Ninja, the ZX-10R Ninja and the ZX-14. OK, Suzuki next. They >> have bikes they classify as 'Sport / Sport Touring' and 'Supersport'. >> We take the 'Supersport' category and we get the GSX-R600, the >> GSX-R750, the GSX- R1000 and the Hayabusa. >> >> I'm happy with all of those (actually, I really would be). Want to try >> Ducati? They have categories called 'SportClassic' and 'Superbike'. And >> if you do the obvious and select 'Superbike', you get the 848, 1098R, >> 1198 and 1198S. >> >> I could go on but I think Nev.. is snoring. Anyone interested in >> offering a contradictory example? > > hmm... you've ignored a few 1300+cc 150+HP 260+kph machines which people > do buy for their touring capabilities. > > Nev.. > '08 DL1000K8 No I haven't. In Kawasaki's range I've *included* the ZX-14 and in Suzuki's range I've *included* the Haybusa, even though I don't think either of them are really sports bikes (more Grand Tourer with sporting pretensions). Kawasaki don't count the GTR1400 as a supersports bike and so neither do I. They don't count the Ninja 250R as a supersports bike, even though it is deliberately styled to look like one, and so I don't either. Look, take a manufacturer that doesn't classify its range, like Triumph. The Daytona 675 is a sports bike. The Street Triple is not. Nor is the Sprint ST. Etc. Etc. Triumph only make one sports bike. You can take your Rocket III Roadster to a track day if you want, and it may even be surprisingly competitive, but that doesn't make it a sports bike. -- Regards Andrew |