Good two-wheeler for non-cyclists though

Post #362,474 by malraux 9/11/12 12:26:50 PM Reply	Good two-wheeler for non-cyclists though I'm a little concerned about what happens to the flywheels in an accident. They're right under the seat, and I don't fancy that "getting hit by a small elephant" effect right under me. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #362,489 by scoenye 9/11/12 11:10:42 PM Reply	Not the only thing to be concerned about A failure in the electronics will not be pretty. There aren't too many happy scenarios if it happens in a turn. (Going out on a limb, I'd say this application is similar to the ABS + ESP package in a car. Those controllers do go into failsafe mode quite often.) IMO, they should have named it C5 instead of C1 (ask Peter ;-)
Post #362,498 by drook 9/12/12 7:37:23 AM Reply	Nah, call it the C4 -- Drew
Post #362,508 by Ashton 9/12/12 3:35:08 PM Reply	Indeed, a reprise of the Airbus-300 scenario in the Pacific --violates Occam2 (?) You do not want transistors between you and The Brakes, unless backed by mech/hydraulic override; ditto re the actual (faux-) 'stability': also dependent upon faultless operation (as you say: in. a. turn! Best example.) Methinks that, as these factors emerge--likely so shall funding diminish; just a w.a.g.; nevertheless, lots of cute ideas there, were these basic Gotchas somehow resolvable.
Post #362,513 by drook 9/12/12 5:52:55 PM Reply	Lots of the same could be said of a Segway -- Drew
Post #362,514 by Andrew Grygus 9/12/12 6:42:18 PM Reply	Yeahbut . . . Segways don't go 100 mph, you aren't latched inside, and they don't weigh that much. You can just step off a misbehaving Segway. Not much relevance there.
Post #362,516 by malraux 9/12/12 7:27:09 PM Reply	120 mph 0-60 in 6 seconds. In a two-wheeled go-kart. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #362,518 by static 9/12/12 7:34:50 PM Reply	That's faster acceleration than most cars... Just Add Story http://justaddstory.wordpress.com/
Post #362,519 by Andrew Grygus 9/12/12 7:35:34 PM Reply	Yeah, but you'd have to be nuts to drive that thing . . . . . at over 100 mph. Heck, I topped out at 115 mph in a rock solid XK150 Jaguar (well, OK, it was raining and it was on the undulating two lane Pearblossom Highway, so I was airborne every 5 seconds or so). The previous owner, my uncle Lou, decided to see if it would really go 150 mph on a long flat stretch in Arizona. He reported that he went 140 mph - the car was still accelerating.
Post #362,522 by malraux 9/12/12 8:01:19 PM Reply	Re: Yeah, but you'd have to be nuts to drive that thing . . I've been in a 1969 Buick LeSabre with the needle buried at 120. It was still accelerating as well, and I just simply could not tell how fast the car was going. I can't imagine going that fast in a two-wheeler tin can. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #362,527 by Ashton 9/12/12 8:48:18 PM 9/12/12 8:55:06 PM Reply	Can assure you, then.. That 120+ on a Black Shadow was as 'unremarkable' a velocity, in all terms of say, "routine confidence that one is in full control" --as, was it simply 'normal': to cruise some long (boring) highway at 85-90 mph, taking advantage of fact that the wind pressure on torso, which just-balanced any downward force on the handlebars (because of the forward body angle to the short un-raised handlebars) --was kinda like "power steering" er, "wind-cancellation" driving: Bonus. Worked for me--no butterflies. (But yes, sustained 120 mph cruising would place a strain on shoulders, in time. No-traffic a requisite, natch. Wind-force is still a force, resisted by muscles.) Ed: PS: My brief tenure with a '70 Riviera, a thinly-disguised, actually good handling! 5000# monster, suggests that you might have hit 125ish; that is, on one event I saw >130 on clock; shut down for doubt about tires' (near-new) max speed rating.. Was probably getting ~ 4 mi/gallon, then.. what a gas hog it was, those 5000#s. Edited by Ashton Sept. 12, 2012, 08:55:06 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #362,528 by malraux 9/12/12 9:09:52 PM Reply	This car had a 455 and a "commuter car" differential gear ratio. I suspect it could have hit 150 easily. Even with a low ratio it would still shred the tires at stop signs. What a fun car. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #362,529 by Another Scott 9/12/12 9:37:12 PM Reply	Torque is fun.
Post #362,530 by drook 9/12/12 9:46:18 PM Reply	Did that on a Kawasaki 750 turbo I looked down to see how fast I was going and I couldn't see the needle. And it was still pulling. -- Drew
Post #362,542 by folkert 9/13/12 9:28:20 AM Reply	While in the Marine Corps... had a GSXR1100. I spent an additional $3000 on the motor and trans and suspension and accessories, including a new Tach that went to 20,000 (redline was like 18K) and a speedo that was supposed to be certified to 200MPH. It could do 100 in 2nd without trying. I had it up there in the high 170s and decided it was fast enough. It could have still gone more. I had another gear, besides RPMs left in 5th. The rush of the wind was something, the blur of the landscape, the tunnel vision, every nerve alive... its all very real. This was in my foolish years, before I had my car-motorcycle accident. I'm now in my foolish years again.

Welcome to IWETHEY!