nigel dabster Posted May 29, 2014 Report Share Posted May 29, 2014 my bike wouldnt be as reliable as my sherpa? Having owned both their is very little to choose to be honest, can remember doing a season on both with very little in the way of breakdowns either 2012 or 1982. But as sure as eggs is eggs the GG is easier to look after and time in workshop is probably 10% of what it was, the bike stops and starts and I wouldnt want to change back as an every week ride. Without doubt weight had/has no influence on the reliability of both. Anecdotal evidence also is not a fact simply because you hear it and whilst your pals may have had problems this does not mean that every gas gas breaks gearboxes or every beta has a bad coil or leaky exhaust, both you and I do not know whether its simply bad luck, poor prep or faulty design. If you insist on not accepting a simple and basic F1 fact when presented to you by both myself and s e lucas there is little point in trying to get you to see reason on this or any topic. So in case you are in any doubt, you cannot compare a faster car (2004) with a slower car (2014) and say the spend billions as its the REGULATIONS that mean they are slower round monaco not wasted money. Repeating an untruth simply makes you appear like a small child with their fingers in their ears shouting la la la while someone is telling them their wrong. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie_lejeune Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 my bike wouldnt be as reliable as my sherpa? Having owned both their is very little to choose to be honest, can remember doing a season on both with very little in the way of breakdowns either 2012 or 1982. But as sure as eggs is eggs the GG is easier to look after and time in workshop is probably 10% of what it was, the bike stops and starts and I wouldnt want to change back as an every week ride. Without doubt weight had/has no influence on the reliability of both. Anecdotal evidence also is not a fact simply because you hear it and whilst your pals may have had problems this does not mean that every gas gas breaks gearboxes or every beta has a bad coil or leaky exhaust, both you and I do not know whether its simply bad luck, poor prep or faulty design. If you insist on not accepting a simple and basic F1 fact when presented to you by both myself and s e lucas there is little point in trying to get you to see reason on this or any topic. So in case you are in any doubt, you cannot compare a faster car (2004) with a slower car (2014) and say the spend billions as its the REGULATIONS that mean they are slower round monaco not wasted money. Repeating an untruth simply makes you appear like a small child with their fingers in their ears shouting la la la while someone is telling them their wrong. is that your longest ever post? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 is that your longest ever post? doubt it , point taken I need to get a life! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perce Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 doubt it , point taken I need to get a life! Either that or you've been spending too long talking to your hens Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadof2 Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 Dabster, and to a lesser extent Lucas, you need to go back and read my post carefully, not slang off what you thought I wrote. EG I did not use the word wasted and what I have said is true. F1 cars are slower than the used to be and in the 10 year period I quoted billions, have been spent trying to make them go faster. Dabster, The comparison between your Bulto and Gasgas is irrelevant to my post. The point I was making was that to club riders in my area bike fragility was of far greater concern than WTC. By the way I had a 1971 250 Bulto trials that could run flat out on full throttle at an indicated speed of 72 mph for 4 miles. Try that on your modern Gasgas. To get back to the main topic (weight).Most if not all the shortcomings and fragility of modern bikes is due to parts being too light and small. When I see the ease with which several club riders and lower level hard course riders can flick round a 77 kg 4RT on the spot it make me confident increasing the minimum weight a little will have no detrimental effect on the sport and if designers use the freedom to have more weight on the bikes to put a bit more strength in the right places it would be greatly beneficial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heffergm Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 F1 cars are slower than the used to be and in the 10 year period I quoted billions, have been spent trying to make them go faster. I don't really see that the analogy or the point is relevant. F1 cars are cars built to adhere to a given Formula, hence the name. They spend huge sums of money making the cars as fast as they can be within the boundaries of adherence to that formula. Whether or not they're faster or slower than they were 10 years ago is irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted June 1, 2014 Report Share Posted June 1, 2014 Both heffergem i and many others read your post daddy and we both understood exactly what you said, and not for the first time repeating the irrelevent point doesnt make it true. If you dont want to debate something and accept that what is a fact is one whats the point in anyone listening? Anecdotal evidence of your mates talking non stop about fragility (which is not necessarily the same as reliability) clearly is not the hot topic around the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted June 1, 2014 Report Share Posted June 1, 2014 72mph on a 71 250 bulto for 4 miles? Really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony27 Posted June 1, 2014 Report Share Posted June 1, 2014 (edited) For the same reason more people ride bigger bikes rather than 125s, power rules if you're not a featherweight & have you seen the ironing/surfboard that gets called a rear guard on the ty125s? I tried 1 when they were new & some of the climbs we did there was no way I'd make it anywhere near the top & the regular rider had the same problem, had to be valve bouncing in first or second - not sure which as it was so long ago, the bike just didn't have the power or torque to pull the next gear with a short run up & even then it was running out of power partway up Edited June 1, 2014 by tony27 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perce Posted June 1, 2014 Report Share Posted June 1, 2014 72mph on a 71 250 bulto for 4 miles? Really? I actually think you'll be better off talking to the hens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted June 1, 2014 Report Share Posted June 1, 2014 I actually think you'll be better off talking to the hens. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ross brown Posted June 2, 2014 Report Share Posted June 2, 2014 Here is my 2cents. Trials needs to embrace technology. Specifically the web for live broadcasts of the world rounds. I just started riding trials after ear surgery, after 30 years of surfing. Surfing is and always will be a marginal sport, but the pro side of things was saved by doing live broadcasts from remote locations. Finally you could actually see how good these guys and gals were. Plus the motivation now existed to improve and surf like they did. It also showed how much fun surfing was to a non surfing public. Jon Yes but.... Surfers at pro level look good. Great bodies. Fabulous sunny locations. Blue water, white sand. The power of nature on display. All in all an Aspirational show for teens and adults to watch. Speed also a factor. Also rules very simple to understand by general public. No compare with our sport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadof2 Posted June 2, 2014 Report Share Posted June 2, 2014 72 mph on a 250 Bulto? An indicated 72mph yes. Flat on the tank, full throttle, Racer SAE40 oil at 24:1. Fingers ready over the clutch in case the piston seized. At the end of the run the rear tyre (12 PSI cold) was too hot to touch and smelt of burning rubber. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted June 2, 2014 Report Share Posted June 2, 2014 72 mph on a 250 Bulto? An indicated 72mph yes. Flat on the tank, full throttle, Racer SAE40 oil at 24:1. Fingers ready over the clutch in case the piston seized. At the end of the run the rear tyre (12 PSI cold) was too hot to touch and smelt of burning rubber. Think you should try Douglas first week in june. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neils on wheels Posted June 2, 2014 Report Share Posted June 2, 2014 By the way I had a 1971 250 Bulto trials that could run flat out on full throttle at an indicated speed of 72 mph for 4 miles. What happened at mile five? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.