 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Mazda / Mazda Miata / March 2008Crazy beemers
Dunno whats up with Ebay. All I see anywhere else is people asking more and more for them... 4-5000 for R75's and R90's, 10k for R90S's... On ebay, watched a really nice looking R100S go for only $2800. Then a questionable R100/7, that the guy "fixed himself", possible serious sun rot, "Buy this so I can go to mechanic school" and how he broke his leg, goes for $2500. $5000 buy-it-now on a low-mile R90/6 with a dumb-looking white Windjammer on it, openers was $3500/doesn't meet reserve, got one minimum bid. I guess I can see clean or low-mile bikes going for more, but this is just all over the map. Obviously theres a cadre of people out there who thinks they can buy an orphaned R90 for $1500, change the oil, and it will be worth $5000. NOBODY that I've asked has owned the bike they're selling any longer than last spring. All I can figure is, the people that get a good one never sell them 'til they die. Grumpy today. See you tomorrow. miker Never mind... obviously THIS went to the wrong place... miker > Dunno whats up with Ebay. > Never mind... obviously THIS went to the wrong place... Maybe not, I used the money from the sale of my 1984 R100RT to buy my 1992 Miata so doesn't that make Beemers on topic? PS, it's nice to see someone who knows the difference between Beemers and Bimmers!  SignatureXS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org > Maybe not, I used the money from the sale of my 1984 R100RT to buy my > 1992 Miata so doesn't that make Beemers on topic? Have you ridden any of the heavy-flywheel bikes ('80 and earlier I think) to compare highway vibration to? I've been wanting to ask someone who's experienced both. miker >> Maybe not, I used the money from the sale of my 1984 R100RT to >> buy my 1992 Miata so doesn't that make Beemers on topic? > > Have you ridden any of the heavy-flywheel bikes ('80 and earlier I > think) to compare highway vibration to? I've been wanting to ask > someone who's experienced both. Yes, my first BMW was a 1976 R90/6, didn't have any noticible vibration, I also had a 1977 R100S, a 1980 R100RT and the 1984 R100RT inbetween and among a K100RT which did vibrate a little at speeds that I won't admit to*! None of the twins did. *You know I'm just imagining that, I'd never break a speed limit, that would be wrong! Gotta go now, my nose is growing... SignatureXS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org >Never mind... obviously THIS went to the wrong place... > >miker > >> Dunno whats up with Ebay. I've got both ! does that make it on topic ?? Mk2.5 1.8iS & 1981 R100RS :-) Bob > I've got both ! > does that make it on topic ?? Might as well ask... do we have a lot of riders here? IMO the Miata is probably the best modern car available for getting close to cycle-type fun. Just not the same view (with the low seating). miker > Might as well ask... do we have a lot of riders here? My wife and I used to race dirt bikes (national enduro circuit). I tried street riding a couple of times, but sharing the road with cars was too nerve-wracking to be fun. SignatureLanny Chambers St. Louis, MO '94C > My wife and I used to race dirt bikes (national enduro circuit). I tried > street riding a couple of times, but sharing the road with cars was too > nerve-wracking to be fun. Now, Lanny, how in the world can you say it's not fun? I always had great exciting fun riding my bike on the public streets, all the way up to the last couple of seconds when that old lady pulled her Buick out past the stop sign right in front of me. It wasn't exactly fun wearing that foam donut around my neck for the next few months, but hey! I wasn't riding a bike at that time either, so that doesn't count against the question. yrs jp >> I've got both ! >> does that make it on topic ?? > > Might as well ask... do we have a lot of riders here? I think so. > IMO the Miata is probably the best modern car available for > getting close to cycle-type fun. Just not the same view (with the > low seating). Agreed, I got mine as a replacement for motorcycling when I was no longer able to ride. It's fun but it's not a satisfactory replacement, unfortunately. SignatureXS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org > Agreed, I got mine as a replacement for motorcycling when I was no > longer able to ride. It's fun but it's not a satisfactory replacement, > unfortunately. I have been rear-ended 4 times in an automobile. 3 of those would have definitely injured me. Instead, zero injuries. I hit a deer in my Miata at 60mph. That would have either seriously injured me or killed me if I had been riding a two-wheeler. Again, zero injuries. The cop that was killed while escorting Clinton in Dallas was on a motorcycle, as were two other police officers who were escorting President Bush in Nevada and Hawaii just in the last year. I also have two friends who each have a leg pinned together after being hit by a car and using their legs as the side-impact bar. I would consider riding a motorcycle on a roadway that only allowed other motorcycles. Sharing the road with large vehicles is so unsafe, imo, that no amount of fun could possibly make up for it. Yeah, I know I can get creamed in my little Miata, but at least a small push from behind by a pickup truck while waiting at a stop light won't have me spilled out on the ground next to my vehicle. Pat > The cop that was killed while escorting Clinton in Dallas was on a > motorcycle, Now be fair. That President that was killed in Dallas was in a car. miker >> The cop that was killed while escorting Clinton in Dallas was on a >> motorcycle, > > Now be fair. That President that was killed in Dallas was in a car. A convertable car! That PROVES their all dangerous! I'm really surprised and a bit disappointed in Pat for posting that bit of FUD. :-( You can get killed on a motorcycle, in a car, walking and on February 18th I got run over by a right turning Chevrolet Suburban while in a cross walk WITH a walk sign while on a mobility scooter (walking is one of the things I don't do anymore.) I wasn't hurt but the Pride Cyclone was totalled. http://us.st11.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/yhst-92821211804676_1989_4590478 The estimate is over $1,800 and, since it's a discontinued model, the parts are unavailable so I'm just SOL.... Living is dangerous, being born inevitably leads to death. SignatureXS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org > A convertable car! That PROVES their all dangerous! > > I'm really surprised and a bit disappointed in Pat for posting that bit > of FUD. :-( Almost any disappointment from you is a positive thing from my point of view, seriously. There is no fear, because I stay off of the things. There is no uncertainty, the facts are there to be seen, and no doubt either, as I have never seen a collision between a motorcycle and a car where the 2-wheeler did not get the worst of it by far. If the motorcycle does significant damage to the car or occupants, it is a safe bet that the motorcycle rider is dead. > You can get killed on a motorcycle, in a car, walking and on February > 18th I got run over by a right turning Chevrolet Suburban while in a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://us.st11.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/yhst-92821211804676_1989_4590478 Your chances of serious injury or death are far higher on a motorcycle than in an automobile or while walking, unless you are walking on the highway or in the ghetto. That is not my opinion. If you disagree with that, then you are either going senile or you have not been paying attention. > The estimate is over $1,800 and, since it's a discontinued model, the > parts are unavailable so I'm just SOL.... > > Living is dangerous, being born inevitably leads to death. Yes, but we also have things like seat belts, reserve parachutes, condoms, kevlar vests, helmets, smoke detectors, etc. If none of it matters and we are just going to die anyway, why bother with all of that? Most people wear seat belts in their cars because it increases their chances of living in a bad wreck. Not exactly an option on a motorcycle. I am not suggesting that we huddle around in fear and never take any chances, but if someone chooses to ride a motorcycle on the same roads that thousands of large vehicles with very bad drivers share, I don't have a lot of sympathy when they get flattened. Pat >> A convertable car! That PROVES their all dangerous! >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > If the motorcycle does significant damage to the car or occupants, it is > a safe bet that the motorcycle rider is dead. Taking a step up, you have cars and trucks and the exact same can be said. And based on the number of car/truck accidents around here almost none resulting in injury to the truckdriver while the car drivers are either killed or at the least seriously injured maybe we need to consider not driving cars anymore either. >> You can get killed on a motorcycle, in a car, walking and on February >> 18th I got run over by a right turning Chevrolet Suburban while in a [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > That is not my opinion. If you disagree with that, then you are either > going senile or you have not been paying attention. Which fails to take int o account the notion that I have a better chance of avoiding the accident at the very last minute with my bike which I don't have in a car, even my Miata. >> The estimate is over $1,800 and, since it's a discontinued model, the >> parts are unavailable so I'm just SOL.... [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > If none of it matters and we are just going to die anyway, why bother > with all of that? One takes reasonable and prudent actions. That does not necessarily mean giving up our life so someone else can enjoy theirs more. > Most people wear seat belts in their cars because it increases their > chances of living in a bad wreck. Not exactly an option on a motorcycle. More hype than reality. Standard seatbelts are seldom 100% effective and the kind that would be (6 point racing harness) are illegal in street cars almost everywhere at this poiknt and in some locales can be used as prima facie evidence of street racing. And I believe that Ontario Province has even gone so far as to ban Roll Bars in the last year or so!! > I am not suggesting that we huddle around in fear and never take any > chances, but if someone chooses to ride a motorcycle on the same roads > that thousands of large vehicles with very bad drivers share, I don't > have a lot of sympathy when they get flattened. Funny, that's what the truck drivers in PA say about car drivers. bill SignatureBill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h> > Taking a step up, you have cars and trucks and the exact same can be said. > And based on the number of car/truck accidents around here almost none > resulting in injury to the truckdriver while the car drivers are either > killed or at the least seriously injured maybe we need to consider not > driving cars anymore either. "We" don't need to do anything. I choose not to ride a motorcycle, but I am not trying to make the choice of which vehicle to drive for you or anyone else except perhaps my daughter. > Which fails to take int o account the notion that I have a better chance > of avoiding the accident at the very last minute with my bike which I > don't have in a car, even my Miata. I mentioned hitting a deer at 60 mph in my last Miata. I would not have seen or been able to avoid this animal in any vehicle at that speed, it was a perfect jump, and a helmet would have made it harder to notice if anything. I would probably still be recovering from my injuries had I been on a motorcycle, assuming that I lived. Instead, both myself and my daughter were shaken up but completely unhurt. > One takes reasonable and prudent actions. That does not necessarily mean > giving up our life so someone else can enjoy theirs more. Lots of different perceptions on what is reasonable and prudent, and I am not suggesting that people quit doing fun and dangerous things. As long as it does not harm others, I say go for it. > More hype than reality. Standard seatbelts are seldom 100% effective > and the kind that would be (6 point racing harness) are illegal in > street cars almost everywhere at this poiknt and in some locales can > be used as prima facie evidence of street racing. And I believe that > Ontario Province has even gone so far as to ban Roll Bars in the last > year or so!! Seldom 100% effective? That is a hell of a lot better than never effective at all because they are not there. One lady from Houston that posts on here would absolutely be dead without her safety belt and airbag. I have a racing harness but I seldom wear it. No problem with roll bar bans, I can't see that happening anytime soon. > Funny, that's what the truck drivers in PA say about car drivers. > > bill I have a feeling that Texas has more trucks than PA. One of them ran into my rear bumper years ago. I was in a car a little bigger than a Miata and was pushed forward and had a sore neck for a while. Had I been on a motorcycle, I probably would have ended up underneath his truck. That is at least twice that I would have been seriously injured and possibly killed on a motorcycle, with no amount of skill or experience possibly saving me. Instead, a little sheet metal surrounding me took care of the problem each time. Pat >> Taking a step up, you have cars and trucks and the exact same can be said. >> And based on the number of car/truck accidents around here almost none [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > am not trying to make the choice of which vehicle to drive for you or > anyone else except perhaps my daughter. That's funny..... Actually, it was my daughter (29 years old) who got me back into riding after a more than 30 year hiatus. And I now ride more than she does and plan in the near future to make it my primary way of getting back and forth to work for a substantial savings, even over my Miata!! >> Which fails to take int o account the notion that I have a better chance >> of avoiding the accident at the very last minute with my bike which I [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > was a perfect jump, and a helmet would have made it harder to notice if > anything. The anti-helmet crowd always seem to cite visibility problems, but I have failed to see (sic) any of this. > I would probably still be recovering from my injuries had I been on a > motorcycle, No doubt, if you were riding your motorcycle in a crosswalk when the "Walk" light was lit. :-) > assuming that I lived. Instead, both myself and my daughter > were shaken up but completely unhurt. If you carry your daughter on one of those rolling deathtraps while riding in traffic, you should have your head examined. They are dangerous (and obnoxious, but that's another matter). >> One takes reasonable and prudent actions. That does not necessarily mean >> giving up our life so someone else can enjoy theirs more. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Seldom 100% effective? That is a hell of a lot better than never > effective at all because they are not there. Certainly, but shouldn't the driver be allowed something better? In every state I am aware of (and worse in Canada) they are not. > One lady from Houston that posts on here would absolutely be dead > without her safety belt and airbag. And people here are killed all the time with seatbelts and airbags. They offer little protection when being struck by truck weighing more than 29 ton doing 90mph. Happens on the Interstates here sevral times a month. > I have a racing harness but I seldom wear it. No problem with roll bar > bans, I can't see that happening anytime soon. Read what I said. They have already been banned in Ontario Province (I am a member of a British Car Club in Kingston and this was big news when iyt happened as many people with MG's and Triumphs have them.) And I do not know of any state in the US that allows the use of a racing harness in a street car. Not sure of current law but at one time if you were SCCS and raced your sgtreet car on weekends (for things like Gymkanna) you had to remove the racing harness to get the car inspected. >> Funny, that's what the truck drivers in PA say about car drivers. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > into my rear bumper years ago. I was in a car a little bigger than a > Miata and was pushed forward and had a sore neck for a while. It really has nothign to do with the number of trucks, it has to do with how they drive which is more based on law enforcement than numbers. There is no enforcement against trucks in PA, the drivers know it and drive accordingly. And, if all you got was a sore neck your truck was not like ours as he had to be doing somewhat below their usual 90mph. > Had I been on a motorcycle, I probably would have ended up underneath > his truck. Or possibly gotten out of his way, unless you don't pay attention to traffic around you. I always watch behind me, wether on the bike or in the car. > That is at least twice that I would have been seriously injured and > possibly killed on a motorcycle, with no amount of skill or experience > possibly saving me. Sorry, but if you got rearended while stopped, I don't agree that you could not do anything about it. Guess it depends on driving style. > Instead, a little sheet metal surrounding me took care of the problem > each time. All the sheet metal in the world wouldn't save you in opur usual truck/car collisions. And the truck driver always walks away. bill SignatureBill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h> > Or possibly gotten out of his way, unless you don't pay attention to > traffic around you. I always watch behind me, wether on the bike or > in the car. There is a lot in your post to respond to, but just this one part shows that you are too unintelligent to debate with. You mentioned me getting my head examined, taking your own advice may be beneficial. You have extreme overconfidence in your abilities, and if you think that keeping an eye out behind you will basically end rear end collisions, then that is just ridiculous, unless you have special powers of observation beyond the rest of us mere mortals. It seems to me that you are suffering from delusions of grandeur. Faster than a speeding bullet? Able to leap tall buildings? All just my opinion, as usual. :-) I'll let you get your last word in, don't worry....... Pat > There is a lot in your post to respond to, but just this one part > shows that you are too unintelligent to debate with. What is it about this topic that has turned you from the normal Pat into one of the most obnoxious dorks on Usenet? Seriously, what buttons got pushed? SignatureXS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org > What is it about this topic that has turned you from the normal Pat > into one of the most obnoxious dorks on Usenet? > > Seriously, what buttons got pushed? I would tell you, but with that dork comment, you will just have to wonder on this one. ;-) Pat >> What is it about this topic that has turned you from the normal Pat >> into one of the most obnoxious dorks on Usenet? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I would tell you, but with that dork comment, you will just have to > wonder on this one. ;-) You earned it, your normally cheerful self that we've all come to know and at least tolerate(!) was missing from some of your posts. No explanation needed, just bring back the old Pat, OK? SignatureXS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org > You earned it, your normally cheerful self that we've all come to know > and at least tolerate(!) was missing from some of your posts. > > No explanation needed, just bring back the old Pat, OK? OK, how about we change the subject? What's up with the massive temperature changes? It was 92 degrees on Monday, a 50 year record-breaker here. I was wearing shorts, sandals, and even ditched the shirt, much to the delight of many thousands of Austin women. ;-) Now it is dropping down to freezing. Crazy weather...... Pat >> Or possibly gotten out of his way, unless you don't pay attention to >> traffic around you. I always watch behind me, wether on the bike or >> in the car. > >There is a lot in your post to respond to, but just this one part shows >that you are too unintelligent to debate with. Motorcyclists are routinely taught to plan a route of escape even when stopped for traffic controls, and to constantly check behind to determine if using that escape is necessary. It's that kind of awareness that Bill is referring to. -- Larry > Motorcyclists are routinely taught to plan a route of escape even when stopped > for traffic controls, and to constantly check behind to determine if using that > escape is necessary. It's that kind of awareness that Bill is referring to. > > -- Larry That sounds good in theory. In reality, when I am coming up behind a person on a motorcycle in my car, they are literally never looking behind them to "plan a route of escape". Bill questioned my getting rear-ended, (in a car), based on my driving style, as if looking behind me would have saved me from that happening. I was stopped at a light. Even had I seen the person in the pickup truck that hit me, my choices would have been to try to shove the car beside me out of the way or go into oncoming traffic for a head-on collision. He wasn't there and he talks like he knows what the circumstances were, hence my serious questioning of his intelligence. Pat > Motorcyclists are routinely taught to plan a route of escape even when stopped > for traffic controls, and to constantly check behind to determine if using that > escape is necessary. It's that kind of awareness that Bill is referring to. I guess that's part of the justification for lane-splitting (AFAIK it's legal only in California, mainly because the CHP wants it). Lane-splitting means at a light you can pull your bike up inbetween the cars ahead of you, thus foiling the SUV driver who wants to pull up to the car taillights in front (ignoring the bike behind the car). But lane-splitting is also going between two adjacent moving cars on the freeway. During gridlock I can see it, sorta. At 70mph or more I can't even imagine it. But CHP wants it. miker >>Lane-splitting means at a light you can pull your bike up inbetween the cars >ahead of you, thus foiling the SUV driver who wants to pull up to the car >taillights in front (ignoring the bike behind the car). That's called "filtering", not lane-splitting. >But lane-splitting is also going between two adjacent moving cars on the >freeway. During gridlock I can see it, sorta. At 70mph or more I can't even >imagine it. But CHP wants it. -- Larry > >>Lane-splitting means at a light you can pull your bike up inbetween the cars > >ahead of you, thus foiling the SUV driver who wants to pull up to the car > >taillights in front (ignoring the bike behind the car). > > That's called "filtering", not lane-splitting. Isn't filtering when you "filter" thru the entire pack at the light and wind up at the front? I'm just talking about pulling in between the back two cars so you're not at the very end to be hit, and AFAIK the legality of "lane-splitting" is what allows both behaviors. But I'm from MN and we don't have it here, so mebbe I'm wrong. I did google and wiki before forming that opinion tho. See, I always thought "lane-splitting" must refer to two motorcycles sharing a lane side-by-side, which many states allow. The other definition sounds nuts to me, but turns out thats what it is. miker >> >>Lane-splitting means at a light you can pull your bike up inbetween the >cars [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >so you're not at the very end to be hit, and AFAIK the legality of >"lane-splitting" is what allows both behaviors. Yes, that's what I thought you were describing. If not, never mind... 8;) -- Larry >.... And I do >not know of any state in the US that allows the use of a racing harness >in a street car. Many do. Virginia, for one, even has a provision concerning how the minimum number of points of the harness which must be fastened (2) in order to provide the legally-required protection. My Miata has a Hard Core and five-point harnesses, and has never had any problem passing inspection. I generally drive on the street with three points fastened (two lap, one shoulder). My street seatbelt in no longer accessible. -- Larry <much snippage has taken place> > Sorry, but if you got rearended while stopped, I don't agree that you > could not do anything about it. Guess it depends on driving style. Well, I got rear-ended last night while I was at a full stop, with all lights on, and there was absolutely NOTHING I could have done about it. I was taking a right turn and had to stop to yield to traffic. I sat there for less than 10 seconds waiting for traffic to clear and then the moron in the black Dodge Ram truck behind me hit my car. If I had pulled forward, I would have been nailed by the oncoming traffic and there was no room to go sideways in either direction. His bumper caught the exact middle of my license plate - creased the trunk lid, bowed in the rear finish panel and (apparently) bent the floor of the trunk upwards. Even popped off the plastic surround on the trunk release lever and pushed in the trunk lock cylinder about 3/4". Fortuantely I had not disabled the trunk release inside the cabin. The only way I could have seen him coming was if I'd been standing next to my car looking backwards in the pouring rain so don't expect me to buy into your statement above. Iva & Vixen 2004 Classic Red No more winkin' Miata > Well, I got rear-ended last night while I was at a full stop, with all > lights on, and there was absolutely NOTHING I could have done about [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > 2004 Classic Red > No more winkin' Miata I hate to hear about that, even if it does support my argument. You have not even had the car for long. That is really the only thing that chapped my a.s about Bill's post, the insinuation that I could have done something about getting rear-ended by changing my driving style, presumably to his own. You are also in PA, same as Bill, and I notice that it was a Dodge Ram that hit you. That is also the type of truck that hit me, a pickup truck. Apparently Bill only considers the largest fleet vehicles to be "trucks". It sounds like you took a fairly hard hit, yet no mention of injuries, of which I am glad. I have a feeling that the sheet metal that Bill so quickly discounted did a better job of protecting you than a single rear motorcycle wheel would have. To open up another can of worms, I know that you have a roll bar installed. It was stated by at least one person on here that roll bars are a bad idea for the street because you will hit your head on them if you are rear-ended. Did that occur last night? Good luck on the repairs, insurance and overall PITA involved with this, Pat Pat wrote: > > Well, I got rear-ended last night while I was at a full stop, with all > > lights on, and there was absolutely NOTHING I could have done about [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > I hate to hear about that, even if it does support my argument. You have > not even had the car for long. Only since the end of June. ;-( > That is really the only thing that chapped my a.s about Bill's post, the > insinuation that I could have done something about getting rear-ended by [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > did a better job of protecting you than a single rear motorcycle wheel > would have. Fortunately, it was a low speed impact and the only thing I've noticed is a pulled/sore muscle in my back. At least I didn't aggravate the problem in my left wrist from the last accident! > To open up another can of worms, I know that you have a roll bar > installed. It was stated by at least one person on here that roll bars > are a bad idea for the street because you will hit your head on them if > you are rear-ended. Did that occur last night? Nope, my head never came near the roll bar. Actually, the roll bar installed in the '04 sits above the top of the seats, and I'm vertically challenged <G> so my head did not hit it. > Good luck on the repairs, insurance and overall PITA involved with this, So far the insurance company has been fine - he has the same carrier so I don't anticipate any problems. The only aggravating part will be that I have to get a rental car while Vixen is being fixed. Thanks! Iva & Vixen 2004 Classic Red No more winkin' Miata > Pat wrote: >>> Well, I got rear-ended last night while I was at a full stop, with [quoted text clipped - 81 lines] > 2004 Classic Red > No more winkin' Miata I can't be happy about your wreck, but you have strongly supported two of my arguments that have been challenged here. Yes, you can get rear-ended with absolutely nothing to do about it regardless of experience or driving style, and yes, you can be hit from the rear without hitting your head on that evil roll bar. ;-) Again, glad to hear that you were not injured badly. That is the truly important thing. Pat > Which fails to take int o account the notion that I have a better chance > of avoiding the accident at the very last minute with my bike which I > don't have in a car, even my Miata. Sorry, but I have doubts about this. Or perhaps you aren't familiar with your Miata's capabilities. SignatureLanny Chambers St. Louis, MO '94C > > Which fails to take int o account the notion that I have a better chance > > of avoiding the accident at the very last minute with my bike which I > > don't have in a car, even my Miata. > > Sorry, but I have doubts about this. Or perhaps you aren't familiar with > your Miata's capabilities. I think I'd be more comfortable making a hard panic-type evasive move in the Miata, because it doesn't fall down when the tires slip. But then, the Miata is also about 4x wider than my bike so it's clearly not going to slip thru the same gaps. The answer, as always, is "depends". miker >> Which fails to take int o account the notion that I have a better chance >> of avoiding the accident at the very last minute with my bike which I >> don't have in a car, even my Miata. > > Sorry, but I have doubts about this. Or perhaps you aren't familiar with > your Miata's capabilities. I know my Miata's capabilities. And I know what we learned in school about last minute avoidance with the bike (yes, I went to school before taking up the bike again even though I had ridden in the past.) And in the case of being rear-ended at a stop, I am sure I could get a bike out of the line of fire easier than the Miata. But don't get me wrong, I still love the Miata!!! :-) bill SignatureBill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h> > but if someone chooses to ride a motorcycle on the same roads > that thousands of large vehicles with very bad drivers share, I don't > have a lot of sympathy when they get flattened. > > Pat So if a motorcyclist was hit by a drunk driver that would pose quite a quandry for you, opinion-wise I mean. miker > So if a motorcyclist was hit by a drunk driver that would pose quite a > quandry for you, opinion-wise I mean. > > miker Not at all. The motorcycle rider is making a decision that I consider foolish, but I have no problem with them doing it, it just is not something that I will do. Nothing illegal about it and I don't think that it should be. As far as driving drunk, I still support a very minimum of a two-year revocation of the driver's license on the first offense. Second offense, permanent loss of license. To get caught driving at any time with a suspended license due to drunk driving convictions should result in a minimum of 10 years in jail with no early release. Just my opinion, of course. :-) Pat > Your chances of serious injury or death are far higher on a motorcycle > than in an automobile or while walking, unless you are walking on the > highway or in the ghetto. A little late to be jumping in, but... There's no question motorcycling is dangerous. So is flying an airplane. But you know, there are few things more rewarding. I'm fighting the urge, right now, to get another bike. When I first started riding I took an MSF course and got a motorcycle license. And because I was (mostly) a careful rider, most of the close calls I've had have been because of other motorists. There's no feeling quite like watching some confused-looking retiree bearing down on you, hoping they see notice you because you don't have time to get out of the way. One of my first thoughts after moving to Florida, after realizing I could play golf all year, was that I could ride all year. But the roads are so boring and congested, and there's so many drivers that are let's just say past their prime, I just sort of shelved the idea. I work with a guy who got an SV650 a couple of years ago. Nice bike. "Hey Mike, how's it going?" "Great!" he says, getting off his bike. Not bad for 7:50 am. iwannabikeiwannabikeiwannabike > One of my first thoughts after moving to Florida, after realizing I could > play golf all year, was that I could ride all year. But the roads are so > boring and congested, and there's so many drivers that are let's just say > past their prime, I just sort of shelved the idea. I can see your point. But there's obviously a lot of riders there... I went to bike night at Quaker Steak in St Pete last month, it was packed. 4,000 Harleys, 20 crotch rockets, and 1 BMW. > I work with a guy who got an SV650 a couple of years ago. Nice bike. I'd kinda like one of those myself. Seems like a high point on the fun/bucks curve. miker This is from somebody who owns an '03 SV650 *and* an '06 MX5: Both are high on the affordability/performance/quality scales. Here in the Midwest, the SV650 must stay in the "hangar" during the winter. The MX5 is driven almost all winter. On really snowy days (and we have had a few this year +&@%*!) we use my wife's trusty Korean import. ;-) >> I work with a guy who got an SV650 a couple of years ago. Nice bike. > This is from somebody who owns an '03 SV650 *and* an '06 MX5: Both are > high on the affordability/performance/quality scales. Here in the > Midwest, the SV650 must stay in the "hangar" during the winter. The MX5 > is driven almost all winter. On really snowy days (and we have had a few > this year +&@%*!) we use my wife's trusty Korean import. ;-) The SV650 really makes sense to me, in the same way the Miata does. I care more about light weight, reliability, reasonable cost and rational design more than I do about making fashion statements. >Might as well ask... do we have a lot of riders here? Probably... - Larry '01 Aprilia Mille SL Falco '02 Honda 919 (commuter bike) '84 Interceptor 500 (small emergency backup bike and money sink) '95 Miata R, modified '02 BMW 325i (wife's commuter) '01 Caterham Superlight '72 Elden FF > Might as well ask... do we have a lot of riders here? I bought mine to replace a Yamaha Virago XV535. My wife won't go on the back of the bike (even though she bought it for me for my 50th birthday 5 years ago). Still got the Yam, but will sell it once the weather warms up here in the UK. I was a born again biker, returning after 25 years of car driving, but the traffic over here is much heavier and less considerate towards bikers these days so I've only done a couple of hundred miles on the bike in the last two years. Once my daughter finishes at University this summer my big car will also be sold (needed to transport her belongings to and from Uni) and the Eunos will be my sole transport. I've just taken early retirement from work, so I no longer need a car that can take passengers for work journeys either. Hmmm, perhaps I ought to keep the bike too.... SignatureRob - Shropshire 1996 VR-Limited Eunos Roadster > Might as well ask... do we have a lot of riders here? An ex-one here, had to sell my Monster a couple of years ago though. > IMO the Miata is probably the best modern car available for getting close > to > cycle-type fun. Which is why I bought mine :-) Eric > NOBODY that I've asked has owned the bike they're selling any longer > than last spring. > > All I can figure is, the people that get a good one never sell them 'til > they die. Alternatively, perhaps for many buyers even a good BMW turned out not to be what they'd thought they'd always wanted. Same as Corvette buyers. SignatureLanny Chambers St. Louis, MO '94C > Alternatively, perhaps for many buyers even a good BMW turned out not to > be what they'd thought they'd always wanted. Same as Corvette buyers. Quite often the sellers have 2-3 they're keeping tho. Just a lot of buy/sell on the riff raff. miker I'd always loved sports cars (owned a couple in my younger days) but the Miata had become my realistic dream car. But you know, my wife finally relented on the Miata when I got REAL serious about getting a bike (after not having one for 20 yrs or so). I didn't do it on purpose but the bike 'got me into' my first miata! Cool to see so many bikers here and yes, I'd say the miata is about as close as you can reasonably get to the 2 wheeled experience. Two things that always bring me back to the biking days are 1) temperature changes that you feel as you traverse elevation changes and 2) smells! Man, everything from flowers to restaurant food to wood burning fires. It's experiences that most 4 wheeled folks (with their max-AC on ALL the time) never even know exist! Chris 99BBB > Cool to see so many bikers here and yes, I'd say the miata is about > as close as you can reasonably get to the 2 wheeled experience. I suppose that depends on your definition of reasonable, because 2 other cars spring to mind: - Ariel Atom http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariel_Atom http://www.arielmotor.co.uk/ - Caterham http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caterham_Cars http://www.caterham.co.uk/ (one model even has/had a motorcycle engine) I think it was the Lotus 7 (from which the Caterham is derived) that was meant as a kind of 4-wheel motorcycle. Signaturehttp://www.mat.uc.pt/~rps/ .pt is Portugal| `Whom the gods love die young'-Menander (342-292 BC) Europe | Villeneuve 50-82, Toivonen 56-86, Senna 60-94 > I think it was the Lotus 7 (from which the Caterham is derived) that > was meant as a kind of 4-wheel motorcycle. Actually, the 7 was essentially a street-legal formula car (which weren't mid-engined yet in the mid '50s). It was designed as a cheap kit car (to avoid the steep UK purchase tax on finished cars) that could be driven to the track, raced, and driven home. Lotus abandoned the 7 when the UK joined the EEC in 1973, because the tax dodge evaporated under the new European rules. SignatureLanny Chambers St. Louis, MO '94C |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.