Re: OT: Digital camera opinions

[Mick Whittingham]

In article
<1gpzmks.1pr02e912g2vr4N%chateauSPAMKILL.murray@dsl .pipex.com>, The
Older Gentleman <chateauSPAMKILL.murray@dsl.pipex.com> writes
>Christopher Des Clayes <Chris@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>> >Ahem. There's a certain issue of unsprung weight and power loss in the
>> >shaft vs chain argument, as well.
>> >
>> >Or to put it another way - how many race winning bikes use shafts?
>>
>> Irrelevant except to racers.
>>
>> How many modern bike riders are capable of winning races, even if
>> riding the latest, fastest, chain drive bikes.
>>
>> There's more Oomph left at the back wheel than most riders know how to
>> use, even after the shaft's had its share.
>
>I have to admit that you're absolutely right.
>
>The number of road (ie: not racers) riders I can think of, who can use
>more than, say 80bhp to its absolute full, on public roads, is....
>
><counts fingers>
>
>Zero.
>
>
Like cars people buy bikes for the BHP they produce and then drive them
only using the spread of torque they produce.
--
Mick Whittingham
'and I will make it a felony to drink small beer.'
William Shakespeare, Henry VI part 2.

[The Older Gentleman]

Mick Whittingham <Mick@whittinghamsite.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

> In article
> <1gpzmks.1pr02e912g2vr4N%chateauSPAMKILL.murray@dsl .pipex.com>, The
> Older Gentleman <chateauSPAMKILL.murray@dsl.pipex.com> writes
> >Christopher Des Clayes <Chris@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> >
> >> >Ahem. There's a certain issue of unsprung weight and power loss in the
> >> >shaft vs chain argument, as well.
> >> >
> >> >Or to put it another way - how many race winning bikes use shafts?
> >>
> >> Irrelevant except to racers.
> >>
> >> How many modern bike riders are capable of winning races, even if
> >> riding the latest, fastest, chain drive bikes.
> >>
> >> There's more Oomph left at the back wheel than most riders know how to
> >> use, even after the shaft's had its share.
> >
> >I have to admit that you're absolutely right.
> >
> >The number of road (ie: not racers) riders I can think of, who can use
> >more than, say 80bhp to its absolute full, on public roads, is....
> >
> ><counts fingers>
> >
> >Zero.
> >
> >
> Like cars people buy bikes for the BHP they produce and then drive them
> only using the spread of torque they produce.

Indeed.

I will admit to liking torquey bikes rather more than high-bhp
screamers. I'll make an exception for any two-stroke, though.


--
Trophy 1200 (Doctored) 750SS CB400F CD200 ST70 DT50MX
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....

[Preston Kemp]

Mick Whittingham wrote:

> In article
> <1gpzmks.1pr02e912g2vr4N%chateauSPAMKILL.murray@dsl .pipex.com>, The
> Older Gentleman <chateauSPAMKILL.murray@dsl.pipex.com> writes
> >
> > The number of road (ie: not racers) riders I can think of, who can
> > use more than, say 80bhp to its absolute full, on public roads,
> > is....
> >
> > <counts fingers>
> >
> > Zero.
> >
> >
> Like cars people buy bikes for the BHP they produce and then drive
> them only using the spread of torque they produce.

I think you missed a few 'some's from that comment.


--
Preston.

http://www.muddystuff.co.uk
Off-road classifieds

'02 MV Senna '96 Tiger '79 Fantic 250
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uk_tiger_rides

[Mick Whittingham]

In article
<1gq2rwg.1a0edrufocylcN%chateauSPAMKILL.murray@dsl. pipex.com>, The Older
Gentleman <chateauSPAMKILL.murray@dsl.pipex.com> writes
>Mick Whittingham <Mick@whittinghamsite.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> In article
>> <1gpzmks.1pr02e912g2vr4N%chateauSPAMKILL.murray@dsl .pipex.com>, The
>> Older Gentleman <chateauSPAMKILL.murray@dsl.pipex.com> writes
>> >Christopher Des Clayes <Chris@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Ahem. There's a certain issue of unsprung weight and power loss in the
>> >> >shaft vs chain argument, as well.
>> >> >
>> >> >Or to put it another way - how many race winning bikes use shafts?
>> >>
>> >> Irrelevant except to racers.
>> >>
>> >> How many modern bike riders are capable of winning races, even if
>> >> riding the latest, fastest, chain drive bikes.
>> >>
>> >> There's more Oomph left at the back wheel than most riders know how to
>> >> use, even after the shaft's had its share.
>> >
>> >I have to admit that you're absolutely right.
>> >
>> >The number of road (ie: not racers) riders I can think of, who can use
>> >more than, say 80bhp to its absolute full, on public roads, is....
>> >
>> ><counts fingers>
>> >
>> >Zero.
>> >
>> >
>> Like cars people buy bikes for the BHP they produce and then drive them
>> only using the spread of torque they produce.
>
>Indeed.
>
>I will admit to liking torquey bikes rather more than high-bhp
>screamers. I'll make an exception for any two-stroke, though.
>
>

There is a certain something about the effect of:
"Gutless thing, come on, rev dam you."
To:
"OH SH*T, OH SH*T, OH SH*T........................"

Thinks of sons 250 two stroke twin pre power valve bike.
--
Mick Whittingham
'and I will make it a felony to drink small beer.'
William Shakespeare, Henry VI part 2.

[Lozzo]

Mick Whittingham says...

> There is a certain something about the effect of:
> "Gutless thing, come on, rev dam you."
> To:
> "OH SH*T, OH SH*T, OH SH*T........................"

That's what I love about 2-strokes. There is nothing to beat that semi-
orgasmic shiver that runs through your spine as a tuned 350LC engine
hits the powerband in second gear. The noise, the rush of power, the
front wheel going skywards, while all the time you're waiting for that
little extra scream it'll give out, just before it seizes.

Motorcycling nirvana

--
Lozzo
ZX-9R
In cunnis confidimus

[Christopher Des Clayes]

On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 14:53:09 +0000,
chateauSPAMKILL.murray@dsl.pipex.com (The Older Gentleman) wrote:

>Mick Whittingham <Mick@whittinghamsite.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> In article
>> <1gpzmks.1pr02e912g2vr4N%chateauSPAMKILL.murray@dsl .pipex.com>, The
>> Older Gentleman <chateauSPAMKILL.murray@dsl.pipex.com> writes
>> >Christopher Des Clayes <Chris@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Ahem. There's a certain issue of unsprung weight and power loss in the
>> >> >shaft vs chain argument, as well.
>> >> >
>> >> >Or to put it another way - how many race winning bikes use shafts?
>> >>
>> >> Irrelevant except to racers.
>> >>
>> >> How many modern bike riders are capable of winning races, even if
>> >> riding the latest, fastest, chain drive bikes.
>> >>
>> >> There's more Oomph left at the back wheel than most riders know how to
>> >> use, even after the shaft's had its share.
>> >
>> >I have to admit that you're absolutely right.
>> >
>> >The number of road (ie: not racers) riders I can think of, who can use
>> >more than, say 80bhp to its absolute full, on public roads, is....
>> >
>> ><counts fingers>
>> >
>> >Zero.
>> >
>> >
>> Like cars people buy bikes for the BHP they produce and then drive them
>> only using the spread of torque they produce.
>
>Indeed.
>
>I will admit to liking torquey bikes rather more than high-bhp
>screamers. I'll make an exception for any two-stroke, though.

Ho yus.

Gertrude's only got 47kW (64PS) at 4700 rpm peak power output, but
113Nm (83.3 ft-lb) torque is available at 2800 rpm. She is loads of
fun.

Not to everyone's taste I know, but she'll do for me.
--
Chris Des Clayes (Header addresses are munged)
Reply to chris@ffcc.powernet.co.uk, but remove one "f"
VN1500 Drifter (Gertrude) - Twice the fun at half the speed.
Barrel Bikers (Buckingham) MCC (www.barrelbikers.co.uk) UKMC#9

[Simian]

Mick Whittingham wrote:
>>
> Like cars people buy bikes for the BHP they produce and then drive them
> only using the spread of torque they produce.

Not this person. Mind you, maybe that'll change if I ever have a bike
with lots of torque.



--
ZX7RR.