Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: the biker


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: the biker Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 4:57:29 PM   
Smith117


Posts: 1447
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GreedyTop

Nice :) Good look to it!  I don't really like the auto-trans thing myself, but I could nonetheless see myself running around town on something like that.
Any idea what the market price is set at?



No one is sure because it's not out in the US yet. Though it's offered in Japan for the equivelent of just under $12,000. I assume it will be around that much when it finally makes it to the US.

I'm still fuzzy on the auto/not auto thing about it. They say it's auto in some reports, and in others they say it's manual, but with no clutch. I'm  still researching it. I may not have a definite grasp on it until it gets here and I go shopping for one.

Edited to add:
Oops, premature post-ulation. I researched my bike again after posting this and found this tidbit of new info:

"In automatic mode, riders can choose between the regular D (Drive) and the hopefully more entertaining S (Sports). Those who insist on changing their own gears can still use a handlebar-mounted switch to change over from automatic to push-button manual-shift mode, where you get six ‘gears’ to choose from.

When it goes on sale later this year, the Honda DN-01 is expected to be priced at around US$16,000. We’re sure it’ll be a nice, refined commuter-bike, but really, we’d much rather take a CB1100R of Evo6."

Edited once more to add:
I checked out the two other bikes referenced in that snippet and I think they're ugly as hell.


< Message edited by Smith117 -- 4/25/2008 5:03:53 PM >

(in reply to GreedyTop)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 4:59:36 PM   
Moloch


Posts: 1090
Joined: 6/25/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Smith117

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moloch
Uhh  dont lump us all into one category.  I get woken up 3AM by morons with straight pipes too, it may make them feel better about their penis it wont help me sleep.


We can't lump all bikers into one category. They come in all kinds. Like the sport bikers who do wheelies down the freeway just to see how long they can hold it.

I lost count of the number of sport bike wreck videos I saw on break.com because they were trying to film themselves doing "something cool" on the freeway. I also lost count of the number of times I cracked up when they blew it and trashed their pretty new bike....not to mention themselves. It's like a never-ending episode of Jackass.



Yes yes all sport bike owners run away from police and all the harley owners are knuckle dragging fat idiots.....
Each culture has its retards.

(in reply to Smith117)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 5:01:03 PM   
Smith117


Posts: 1447
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Moloch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Smith117

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moloch
Uhh  dont lump us all into one category.  I get woken up 3AM by morons with straight pipes too, it may make them feel better about their penis it wont help me sleep.


We can't lump all bikers into one category. They come in all kinds. Like the sport bikers who do wheelies down the freeway just to see how long they can hold it.

I lost count of the number of sport bike wreck videos I saw on break.com because they were trying to film themselves doing "something cool" on the freeway. I also lost count of the number of times I cracked up when they blew it and trashed their pretty new bike....not to mention themselves. It's like a never-ending episode of Jackass.



Yes yes all sport bike owners run away from police and all the harley owners are knuckle dragging fat idiots.....
Each culture has its retards.



I don't believe I said "all" of either of those categories. I simply said I lost count of the number I had seen.

(in reply to Moloch)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 5:05:36 PM   
Moloch


Posts: 1090
Joined: 6/25/2005
Status: offline
quote:


So please spare me the "loud pipes save lives" horse manure.  It's not true, and it's been studied.  If bikers were really concerned with safety, they wouldn't lobby state legislatures to have helmet laws removed.  They did that here, and there has been a sharp increase in motorcycle fatalities.  If they were really concerned with safety, they wouldn't wear all black at night while riding. 


Ok next time you get your freak on Im going to write you a 300$ ticket because you didnt use a condom!


(in reply to slaveboyforyou)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 5:07:44 PM   
Smith117


Posts: 1447
Status: offline 		Ok, that makes zero sense. 

(in reply to Moloch)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 5:12:14 PM   
Moloch


Posts: 1090
Joined: 6/25/2005
Status: offline 		If you dont wear a helmet its your head on the line...
If you dont wear a condom its your "head" on the line...
If all bikers were concerned with saftey they wouldnt ride, we just want our right to choose wheter or not we should wear a helmet.

(in reply to Smith117)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 5:14:52 PM   
Smith117


Posts: 1447
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Moloch

If you dont wear a helmet its your head on the line...
If you dont wear a condom its your "head" on the line...
If all bikers were concerned with saftey they wouldnt ride, we just want our right to choose wheter or not we should wear a helmet.



Actually, I've heard it said (and of course I have no sources, largely because I don't feel like looking them up at the moment).....

That the high-level of fatalities from motorcycle wrecks drive up insurance cost for the rest of us both due to paying out to the deceased's family and due to hospitals caring for motorcycle riders that are not insured.

Sealbelt laws are on the books too. Driving/riding is a priviledge, not a right.

< Message edited by Smith117 -- 4/25/2008 5:15:09 PM >

(in reply to Moloch)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 5:21:34 PM   
SirRober


Posts: 364
Joined: 1/2/2006
Status: offline 		OOOoooo "High level fatalities"      WTF do you expect when you are not in a cage.  Motorcycles offer no protection to the rider ,  execpt for  maneverabilty...

Also did you think that maybe the rider was darting around a car """SO THEY WOULDN'T GET HIT"""


YES that is my bike. YES I dart around traffic when they are going to hit me. And no I don't play well with others.

< Message edited by SirRober -- 4/25/2008 5:23:27 PM >

(in reply to Smith117)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 5:24:46 PM   
Smith117


Posts: 1447
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SirRober

OOOoooo "High level fatalities"      WTF do you expect when you are not in a cage.  Motorcycles offer no protection to the rider ,  execpt for  maneverabilty...

Also did you think that maybe the rider was darting around a car """SO THEY WOULDN'T GET HIT"""


YES that is my bike. YES I dart around traffic when they are going to hit me. And no I don't play well with others.


Actually, no. The majority of the times I see it done on the road, it's because the biker got impatient and decided he was too good to wait in line like the rest of us. (They couldn't have been avoiding a car as they are often sitting still in traffic or at lights.)

Nice try though.

Edited to ask the following question:
If you're darting around a line of cars that was in FRONT of you.....how exactly were those cars going to "hit you?"


< Message edited by Smith117 -- 4/25/2008 5:26:07 PM >

(in reply to SirRober)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 5:41:39 PM   
SirRober


Posts: 364
Joined: 1/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Smith117
Edited to ask the following question:
If you're darting around a line of cars that was in FRONT of you.....how exactly were those cars going to "hit you?"



Who said anything about a car in front of me can you put it in a samll mind that the car came from the side????

(in reply to Smith117)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 6:00:39 PM   
Smith117


Posts: 1447
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SirRober

quote:

ORIGINAL: Smith117
Edited to ask the following question:
If you're darting around a line of cars that was in FRONT of you.....how exactly were those cars going to "hit you?"



Who said anything about a car in front of me can you put it in a samll mind that the car came from the side????


Well, it's quite simple really. You said "darting around" not "darting past."

Darting around implies, as in my anecdote a couple of pages ago that they were ahead of you and you darted AROUND them.

Darting past is when they are to the side. However, I still find myself wondering......if they are beside you, how are they going to hit you?

You see, your logic here fails because you tried to be cute and suggest that most bikers darting around someone were trying to avoid getting hit. I'd call that evading, not darting around.

No, what I termed as 'darting around' is when (as in my anecdote) the biker begins BEHIND the car and then gets bored or impatient and juts to one side, rockets past the car that 'was' in front of them and then continues on. I've seen this happen many times. The type you describe, however, I have seen on occasion....though that usually (in my experience) resulted in the biker getting hit anyway and therefore makes your point moot.

(in reply to SirRober)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 6:02:36 PM   
GreedyTop


Posts: 52100
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Savannah, GA
Status: offline
MSF library

if you click on the link under cycle safety info that says crash statistics.... ok, this is from 2001, but still...



_____________________________

polysnortatious
Supreme Goddess of Snark
CHARTER MEMBER: Lance's Fag Hags!
Waiting for my madman in a Blue Box.

(in reply to SirRober)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 6:09:56 PM   
Moloch


Posts: 1090
Joined: 6/25/2005
Status: offline
quote:


That the high-level of fatalities from motorcycle wrecks drive
quote:

ORIGINAL: Smith117

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moloch

If you dont wear a helmet its your head on the line...
If you dont wear a condom its your "head" on the line...
If all bikers were concerned with saftey they wouldnt ride, we just want our right to choose wheter or not we should wear a helmet.



Actually, I've heard it said (and of course I have no sources, largely because I don't feel like looking them up at the moment).....

That the high-level of fatalities from motorcycle wrecks drive up insurance cost for the rest of us both due to paying out to the deceased's family and due to hospitals caring for motorcycle riders that are not insured.

Sealbelt laws are on the books too. Driving/riding is a priviledge, not a right.


So do drunk drivers, uninsured drivers etc...




(in reply to Smith117)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 6:12:23 PM   
southerntannedf


Posts: 4
Joined: 4/16/2008
Status: offline 		*puts her hands together in the traditional "time out" sign..
thanks for the post the original post I will and can pass this on to many freinds who are not on this site and they will love it. Kind of like my jackolope on the wall. It looks like it a real critter, but then like most things in life how they appear and how they are ain't always the same thing. Debates on bike safety will always be a forerunning thing. This wasn't about the bike afety thing it was about the people inside the jackets and the heart they have. Hats off to them. I have seen some ugly lol bikers do some really great stuff in my life.. nessa

(in reply to GreedyTop)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 6:18:53 PM   
Smith117


Posts: 1447
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Moloch
So do drunk drivers, uninsured drivers etc...


Are what? Priviledges? I don't believe I am following your point here.

(in reply to Moloch)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 7:33:15 PM   
petdave


Posts: 2479
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Smith117

"At least the cell phone talker isn't changing lanes once per second (seemingly) or driving at excessive speeds in between cars on the road. They may pay little attention to the road, but for the most part, if you realize the cell talker is there, you can at least predict that she's not paying attention and can react accordingly by simply moving away from her. A biker darting in and out of traffic forces a driver to pay more attention to a smaller, faster, vehicle over a larger, more dangerous one, simply because the smaller, faster vehicle changes position so fast you can't predict reasonably where he's going to be at a given moment. All that needs to happen is for the biker to 'get bored' waiting behind you and then try and dart around you suddenly while you were already in the middle of changing lanes into a lane you previously saw to be clear, but now is not do to the impatience of the biker.


If you signalled, then the rider has no one to blame but himself. If you didn't signal, or signaled after you started moving into the other lane, it's your fault. A rider cutting through traffic is generally not unpredictable- he'll be moving into gaps in traffic that provide enough lead room to move further ahead. Someone who is distracted by a phone, yelling at their kids in the backseat, shaving, speaking in sign language (i shit you not) will be less predictable than a rider, because they end up crossing the lane dividers pretty much based on how well their front end is aligned.

For what it's worth, i have more near-misses with my Chrysler (18 feet long, gleaming white, extensive chrome, loud exhaust exiting through sidepipes) than any of my other vehicles... It's like she's invisible.

...dave
(108 miles on 1.82 gallons = 58 MPG on his wife's Honda Shadow this week... w00t!)

(in reply to Smith117)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 8:12:01 PM   
Smith117


Posts: 1447
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: petdave
Someone who is distracted by a phone, yelling at their kids in the backseat, shaving, speaking in sign language (i shit you not) will be less predictable than a rider, because they end up crossing the lane dividers pretty much based on how well their front end is aligned.


Ahh but what you have now is a comparrison between predictable vs. unpredictable and visible vs. invisible.

Predictability is fine and good, but to predict, you must first see. You can't predict where a vehicle's going to be, if you don't first see where it is. A large car is always more visible than a tiny bike. Most people can agree on this. So it's in the motorcyclists best interest to be not only as visible as possible, but also as predictable as possible.

In my anecdote, I fully knew where the two sport bikes where. They "were" waiting in line behind me, that is, until the light turned green. Then as I made my way through the turn and into my lane (you can't signal right when making a left hand turn) they darted around me with about half a lane to spare, if not less. I had purposefully been driving 'extra carefully' because I had skittish passengers, but had I been driving as "defensively" as I usually do, they would have had nowhere to go and would have seriously eaten curb, followed by trees and whatever else it took to stop their forward movement.

This is my point. The OP went on and on about how motorcyclists aren't "seen" by car drivers. Most of us can agree that this is true. However, if you KNOW you can't be seen, are you then going to up the danger level by risking dangerous maneuvers that are un-neccessary because you don't like how slow traffic is going? Is a wheelie down the freeway seriously what you'd call 'playing it safe?' Is riding the center line between two lanes and the cars in those lanes what you would call the 'proper' way to handle a bike?

The OP talked about bikes not being seen. There are cars which have blind spots big enough to hide an entire SUV. If and when I get my bike, I will be VERY aware of this and I am not going to be doing any showboating on my bike. Without s steel barrier between you and what you hit, there's just......you. I don't know about you, but just because I rock doesn't mean I'm made of stone. So you can bet I'm not going to risk it.

(in reply to petdave)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 8:19:35 PM   
SeeksOnlyOne


Posts: 2012
Joined: 5/14/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Smith117

quote:

ORIGINAL: sirsholly

quote:

ORIGINAL: Smith117

quote:

ORIGINAL: sirsholly
At least with a bike you can hear them coming.


No, you CAN'T. That's the point I, and others, have made here. Those so-loud-they're-illegal pipes DO NOT let you hear them. All they do is wake you out of a sound sleep at 3 am. They do NOT increase your ability to be seen on a busy highway during rush hour.



most bikes have stock pipes...not overbearing and certainly not illegal.



You're still missing the point. Those with loud pipes claim it's for safety. It's not. Those with them or those without them aren't able to be heard on a busy highway anymoreso than a car is. So there is no reason to have them loud enough to wake neighbors. And the "at least you can hear us coming" argument is moot because it just ain't true. If I can't hear you in my car while listening to low-volumed talk radio, others SURE can't hear you with their music blasting and their windows up.



you might not hear them, but you will feel the vibrations.  loud pipes do save lives.  it is true.  deal with it

_____________________________

it aint no good til it hurts just a little bit....jimmy somerville

in those moments of solitude, does everyone sometimes think they are insane? or is it just me?

(in reply to Smith117)
Profile   Post #: 98
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 8:43:49 PM   
Smith117


Posts: 1447
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SeeksOnlyOne
you might not hear them, but you will feel the vibrations.  loud pipes do save lives.  it is true.  deal with it


Riiiight. You're telling me that on a busy freeway, going over rough, jacked-up highways, with stereo pumping out bass-heavy tunes, I'm going to "feel" your tiny little bike sneak up in my blindspot? I doubt that. I doubt that because I know it to be false. You can try and justify your illegally loud pipes all you like, they still aren't any safer on the highways.

As even GreedyTop has pointed out:
quote:

ORIGINAL: GreedyTop
A) as has been pointed out, many of todays cars are designed to be as close to soundproofed as possible.
B) laws of physics: as you're cruising down the highway at traffic speed, the sound is traveling with you. The cars aren't going to hear those loud pipes until you are next to them or passing them. 


You can't argue with physics. Ever commercial I've seen for a 'half decent' car, including the ever-affordable 'economy car,' the Toyota Corolla, advertises shutting out the noise, sounds and vibrations of the road for a 'relaxing driving experience.'

Facts are facts. Physics are physics. Your illegally loud pipes serve only one purpose: waking the neighbors and over-compensating. That's it.

< Message edited by Smith117 -- 4/25/2008 8:44:43 PM >

(in reply to SeeksOnlyOne)
Profile   Post #: 99
RE: the biker - 4/25/2008 9:51:37 PM   
GreedyTop


Posts: 52100
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Savannah, GA
Status: offline 		~slight hijack~

ya know what drives me batshit?  The idiots riding the crotchrockets wearing flip-flops/sandals/sneakers, shorts, tank top (or no top)............and a full face helmet.  And these are often the same ones that drag race on city streets, during business hours.

_____________________________

polysnortatious
Supreme Goddess of Snark
CHARTER MEMBER: Lance's Fag Hags!
Waiting for my madman in a Blue Box.

(in reply to Smith117)
Profile   Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: the biker Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.090