Boxerworks.com

Like ZM it seems he doesn't like scooters.

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/societ ... 1e0pv.html

Article cited wrote:Yet, in this age of greenhouse gas angst, the positive side of motorcycles - that they are a sensible, lower emission means of transport - are ignored by our lily-livered political weathercock governments.

If only that were true. In fact, motorcycles emit more pollution than cars do, because of the lack of emissions control equipment. And they don't use less fossil fuels either - yes they might get better gas mileage, if you ride like a grandma. But when you factor in the increased tire changes they probably use more fossil fuel than cars do. So the environmental impact is more, not less.

Sure are a lot more fun though! As long as one isn't stuck behind a bunch of damn cagers.

[quote="SteveD"]Like ZM it seems he doesn't like scooters.

What's to like?

Good article. I've been thinking of going smaller displacement for my next bike. In British Columbia motorcycle insurance is charged by displacement brackets. Of course this makes no sense if one looks at a Suzuki GSXR750 that would leave any 1700cc cruiser for dead. The suzuki is 2 brackets cheaper to insureIt is much cheaper to insure a 400cc machine than a 450cc bike. I like riding logging roads and trails. I've been eyeing the Yamaha WR250R. Its engine is a slice off the 1000cc R1 engine with first valve clearance scheduled at 42,000 klm. A friend who has one is getting 85 mpg. Nice thing is that this bike is a true dual sport and not a dirt bike with lights. Should have no problem running all day at 70 mph. Perhaps it's time to take advantage of the latest technology. While I'm still young enough to enjoy it!

http://www.yamaha-motor.ca/products/pro ... model=3256

Zombie Master wrote: I've been thinking of going smaller displacement for my next bike.

I remember the 60's (well some of it ).
There were some great bikes under 400cc. The Japanese ones were quite reliable, and they could scoot.
A friend bought a Honda 450 that was a match for my Bonneville, but more reliable.
That Yamaha would be very good. Too bad Honda discontined the XL350. Did you look at the Suzuki DRZ400?
(Dual purpose bikes with 4-stroke motocross engines might be interesting.)
I am intrigued by both the Ninja 250 and CBR250.

Just a thought -
The BMW F650 up to 2000 was a good highway/fireroad bike. (The FUNDURO with 19" front gave you better DP tyre choices than the ST's 18".) The carburetted Rotax 650cc engine was great before BMW decided to use "fool infection".

dougie wrote:

Zombie Master wrote: I've been thinking of going smaller displacement for my next bike.

I remember the 60's (well some of it ).
There were some great bikes under 400cc. The Japanese ones were quite reliable, and they could scoot.
A friend bought a Honda 450 that was a match for my Bonneville, but more reliable.
That Yamaha would be very good. Too bad Honda discontined the XL350. Did you look at the Suzuki DRZ400?
(Dual purpose bikes with 4-stroke motocross engines might be interesting.)
I am intrigued by both the Ninja 250 and CBR250.

Just a thought -
The BMW F650 up to 2000 was a good highway/fireroad bike. (The FUNDURO with 19" front gave you better DP tyre choices than the ST's 18".) The carburetted Rotax 650cc engine was great before BMW decided to use "fool infection".

The CB1 was a very interesting bike. http://www.motorbikes.be/en/Honda_CB_1_1993.aspx I got to use one for a few weeks and was very impressed. There was a brief moment when the Japanese tried to off some high quality small displacement bikes. Sadly it never caught on. My 1989 TDR250 was the first production Super Motard, many years before that style of motorcycle even had a name. The performance of that bike is still unrivaled!

They had (may still have) 4 cylinder 250 sportbikes in Japan.
I tried someone's TDR250 for about 10 minutes. INSANE!

The whole emissions and mileage thing with motorcycles is easy to figure for an individual (the bike is close with one rider, especially if it's a lower displacement machine that gets over 60 mpg, but as soon as you start putting more people in the car it totally kicks the bike's ass), but when you are comparing thousands of bikes, or 10's of thousands of bikes, it gets much more complicated, and I believe that's what the author was talking about. If say 25% of the traffic was motorcycles instead of cars, if that reduced congestion changes traffic jams into flowing traffic where ALL the vehicles on the road are getting where they are going without being stuck in a traffic jam, then the increased motorcycle use is saving gas and emissions in ALL the vehicles on the road. That equates to an enormous savings overall, but it's very hard to predict or measure in exact numbers.

Major Softie wrote:The whole emissions and mileage thing with motorcycles is easy to figure for an individual (the bike is close with one rider, especially if it's a lower displacement machine that gets over 60 mpg, but as soon as you start putting more people in the car it totally kicks the bike's ass), but when you are comparing thousands of bikes, or 10's of thousands of bikes, it gets much more complicated, and I believe that's what the author was talking about. If say 25% of the traffic was motorcycles instead of cars, if that reduced congestion changes traffic jams into flowing traffic where ALL the vehicles on the road are getting where they are going without being stuck in a traffic jam, then the increased motorcycle use is saving gas and emissions in ALL the vehicles on the road. That equates to an enormous savings overall, but it's very hard to predict or measure in exact numbers.

I guess it's relative to place. If this lot used fleets of buses, it might be better?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JNWucQJ ... re=related

SteveD wrote: I guess it's relative to place. If this lot used fleets of buses, it might be better?

Na, who wants to catch a bus to the beach?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inA-36YRV0Y&feature=fvsr