What is gr8 about motorcycling?
-
- Posts: 3647
- Joined: 28 Jan 2013, 5:58pm
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
I'm an ex-motorcyclist, in the sense that I sold my last bike in Aug 2013 and have no intention of buying another. I had always done a fair few commuting miles on the bike but just wasn't doing enough to warrant keeping it.
On club runs we occasionally go to the Manor Cafe http://www.manor-cafe.co.uk/ - which caters to motorcyclists riding in the Dales and I think the main difference between motorcyclists and cyclists is size. I'm always faintly amused to see this crew of mainly rake-thin, lyrca-clad cyclists compared to mainly overweight bikers garbed in leather and kevlar. You also notice differences like cyclists don't wear moustaches, bikers seem to be more likely to have them than the general population and I'd generally say we (as a group) are louder than bikers - though our group can be bigger than any other single bunch in this cafe dedicated to petrol and kneesliders.
On club runs we occasionally go to the Manor Cafe http://www.manor-cafe.co.uk/ - which caters to motorcyclists riding in the Dales and I think the main difference between motorcyclists and cyclists is size. I'm always faintly amused to see this crew of mainly rake-thin, lyrca-clad cyclists compared to mainly overweight bikers garbed in leather and kevlar. You also notice differences like cyclists don't wear moustaches, bikers seem to be more likely to have them than the general population and I'd generally say we (as a group) are louder than bikers - though our group can be bigger than any other single bunch in this cafe dedicated to petrol and kneesliders.
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
horizon wrote:bikes than between motorbikes and cars. Now that is debatable, I admit.
Is it?
It's a powered bicycle. No different than an assisted bicycle and we discuss those all the time. The physics and dynamics are the same, the problems very similar the only real difference is how rules are applied.
If you want to make it debatable then you'd need to remove assisted bicycles from the bicycle genre because as long as they're there then motorcycles are simply the next evolutionary step and as fast electric bicycles appear along with electric motorcycles then it's a very blurry line with no clear delineation.
Cars on the other hand have almost nothing in common with motorcycles.
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
kwackers wrote:If you want to make it debatable
Well It's probably inherent in this thread. But I won't be debating it though: I have virtually no experience of motorbikes. The closest I came was a toss-up between a motorbike for two (me + a passenger) and a Citroen 2CV. The 2CV won but the choice was never between a motorbike and a bicycle.
So I'm left with just my general impressions and surmises: for me the dividing line is power. That's why I'm a bit concerned (intellectually) about electric assist - it blurs the line.
I'm open to and interested in people's views on here, those that say the motorcycle experience is closer to that of a cycle than a car but I put both cars and motorbikes on the other side of a line from bicycles. But that may be as much a reflection of my views on pollution etc rather than the riding experience itself.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
-
- Posts: 9509
- Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
There is I believe a distinction between electrically assisted cycles and other 2 wheeled, powered vehicles. That is the speed limit of 15mph which is what these electrically assisted cycles have as their limited top speed. Now I always wondered whether you could turn the motor off and go above 15mph with them or is the motor always on providing power to get up to 15mph or resisting excess speed over 15mph?
AFAIK anything going quicker is classes as a motorbike I supposes with the relevent licence, VED and registration requirements. Arbitary distinction but is placed there in the UK by some authority.
Personally I think of motorbikes as halfway between cycles and cars. Half a car (in that only two wheels) so handles like a cycle, but powered so it has speed like cars (and then some in the super sports category of motorbikes). I accept the handling as being closer to cycles since I have only one experience of bikes. i got a lift on the back of a relatives bike once. The one thing I still remember was being told in no uncertain terms that the motorbike relies on leaning the bike to turn. Not being used to it in quite the same way (IMHO cycling is a bit different in the way of steering to me at least) so I didn't lean right and part way through a turn I got shouted at to lean to the left or we'd be into the other lane of traffic. I still remember the anger and perhaps a bit of fear as my relative was unable to steer right because of this inexperienced lump behind him. Well I was only 9 at the time. To me, from that one memory, they felt like they handled differently to cycles and cars. I guess that is why I see them has halfway between cars and cycles.
BTW I am not sure I have given my inexperienced view to the question in the title. I reckon what is gr8 is the way you can get speed without a lot of effort like a car, yet you are more part of the environment like a cycle. It is freedom from the metal box but with the same speed capabilities (indeed sometimes a lot more speed). The corollary question should be asked too, what is so bad about motorcycling? That has been answered a lot in this thread and that is the minorities who are irresponsible in that they have these powerful machines and cause a nuisance such as riding on the wrong side around bends, taking off legal exhausts to put on noisy pipes to get that bit more speed, racing on the roads, ducking in and out of traffic like dodgy cyclists do infuriating those motorists who can't, duck in and out of their lane to get past cars when it is not strictly safe to do so (you know the sorts, the ones who blitz around a car even though an oncoming car means there is not really a big enough gap), etc. Not all of them are unique to bikes. There are plenty of car owners with noisy exhaust pipes and plenty of cyclists ducking and diving in traffic in an unsafe manner. I guess it is just another way they are like car drivers and cyclists.
AFAIK anything going quicker is classes as a motorbike I supposes with the relevent licence, VED and registration requirements. Arbitary distinction but is placed there in the UK by some authority.
Personally I think of motorbikes as halfway between cycles and cars. Half a car (in that only two wheels) so handles like a cycle, but powered so it has speed like cars (and then some in the super sports category of motorbikes). I accept the handling as being closer to cycles since I have only one experience of bikes. i got a lift on the back of a relatives bike once. The one thing I still remember was being told in no uncertain terms that the motorbike relies on leaning the bike to turn. Not being used to it in quite the same way (IMHO cycling is a bit different in the way of steering to me at least) so I didn't lean right and part way through a turn I got shouted at to lean to the left or we'd be into the other lane of traffic. I still remember the anger and perhaps a bit of fear as my relative was unable to steer right because of this inexperienced lump behind him. Well I was only 9 at the time. To me, from that one memory, they felt like they handled differently to cycles and cars. I guess that is why I see them has halfway between cars and cycles.
BTW I am not sure I have given my inexperienced view to the question in the title. I reckon what is gr8 is the way you can get speed without a lot of effort like a car, yet you are more part of the environment like a cycle. It is freedom from the metal box but with the same speed capabilities (indeed sometimes a lot more speed). The corollary question should be asked too, what is so bad about motorcycling? That has been answered a lot in this thread and that is the minorities who are irresponsible in that they have these powerful machines and cause a nuisance such as riding on the wrong side around bends, taking off legal exhausts to put on noisy pipes to get that bit more speed, racing on the roads, ducking in and out of traffic like dodgy cyclists do infuriating those motorists who can't, duck in and out of their lane to get past cars when it is not strictly safe to do so (you know the sorts, the ones who blitz around a car even though an oncoming car means there is not really a big enough gap), etc. Not all of them are unique to bikes. There are plenty of car owners with noisy exhaust pipes and plenty of cyclists ducking and diving in traffic in an unsafe manner. I guess it is just another way they are like car drivers and cyclists.
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
Tangled Metal wrote:Now I always wondered whether you could turn the motor off and go above 15mph with them or is the motor always on providing power to get up to 15mph or resisting excess speed over 15mph?
Just like any other bicycle you can go as fast as you can pedal - you simply lose assist above 15mph.
It's a completely arbitrary line though.
If you want to argue that the difference between a motorcycle and a bicycle is what is defined by the government then the argument is closed.
I believe the discussion is about whether a motorcycle is closer to a car or a bike though, in which case I maintain it's much closer to a bike and the introduction of assisted bicycles has shifted it even more in that direction.
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
horizon wrote:But that may be as much a reflection of my views on pollution etc rather than the riding experience itself.
Electric motorcycles already exist. Fast electrified bikes already exist.
It's a very blurry line and I reckon you could line up a row of vehicles from a bicycle to a sports motorcycle that would form a very obvious lineage from one to the other.
OTOH you couldn't do the same from a bicycle to a car.
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
Maybe not a bicycle, but other human powered vehicles. The bicycle is to the electrically assisted bicycle, the moped and motorcycle what the quadracycle is to the electrically assisted quadracycle, quad bike and motor car. This logic suggests a pedal bicycle has more in common with a motorbike than a pedal tricycle
Nobody is going to win this argument because it depends upon individual perspective. To you are pedal bicycles first and foremost human powered or two wheeled vehicles?
For me the essence of cycling is its human powered nature, number of wheels, size, need to balance etc are irrelevant
Nobody is going to win this argument because it depends upon individual perspective. To you are pedal bicycles first and foremost human powered or two wheeled vehicles?
For me the essence of cycling is its human powered nature, number of wheels, size, need to balance etc are irrelevant
Last edited by Bicycler on 16 Apr 2015, 12:07pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
Bicycler wrote:For me the essence of cycling is its human powered nature, number of wheels is an irrelevance
I agree. It defines everything.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
horizon wrote:Bicycler wrote:For me the essence of cycling is its human powered nature, number of wheels is an irrelevance
I agree. It defines everything.
Once you've made that choice then logic dictates you have to remove assisted bicycles from it.
Are you happy with that?
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
A good question and yes. Hence my thread about powered cycling. If the people who believe in new battery power are right then we are in IMV for a sea change in cycling.
BTW I don't have any objection to motorcycles (apart from the usual obvious ones) but they don't grab my interest as I would choose a car over a motorbike. Don't forget that the 2CV had a roll back roof, leaned dramatically into corners, made lots of noise and only had a 600cc engine. All it had over a motorbike was two extra wheels, two extra seats and the ability not to wear a helmet.
BTW I don't have any objection to motorcycles (apart from the usual obvious ones) but they don't grab my interest as I would choose a car over a motorbike. Don't forget that the 2CV had a roll back roof, leaned dramatically into corners, made lots of noise and only had a 600cc engine. All it had over a motorbike was two extra wheels, two extra seats and the ability not to wear a helmet.
Last edited by horizon on 16 Apr 2015, 1:01pm, edited 1 time in total.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
horizon wrote:two extra wheels
IMO at that point it fails...
It drives like a car, has controls like a car and looks and feels like a car.
(If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck etc etc)
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
Bicycler wrote:Nobody is going to win this argument because it depends upon individual perspective. To you are pedal bicycles first and foremost human powered or two wheeled vehicles?
Exactly.
If you're arguing the legal case, motorcycles are cars.
Number of wheels and basic control mechanisms then they're bicycles.
From a pedantic pov you can't have a 3 wheeled bicycle because it's a tricycle (or any other number other than 2) and motorcycle is a contraction of motorised-bicycle. Interesting because as electrical assist becomes more popular we appear to be heading full circle!
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
It's more like a duck. The Germans called it the Ente ( = duck in German, which I presume you meant).
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
kwackers wrote:horizon wrote:Bicycler wrote:For me the essence of cycling is its human powered nature, number of wheels is an irrelevance
I agree. It defines everything.
Once you've made that choice then logic dictates you have to remove assisted bicycles from it.
Are you happy with that?
I'm happy removing vehicles without human propulsion from my definition of 'cycling' (not that that affects anybody else's right to use such vehicles). I think the clue in the phrase 'electrical assistance' is the word 'assistance'. I think we can draw a line between a battery backup used to assist a primarily human powered vehicle and a vehicle which requires no human propulsion.
I repeat that it is this human propulsion which defines cycling for me. I could swap my bikes for tricycles, handcycles or pedal cars and when riding I would still in my mind be doing the same activity. If I was instead to use a motorised vehicle with an equivalent number of wheels I would think of myself as undertaking a different activity.
From a pedantic pov you can't have a 3 wheeled bicycle because it's a tricycle (or any other number other than 2) and motorcycle is a contraction of motorised-bicycle.
Quite. Though I did think that motorcycle is used to refer to both 2 and 3 wheeled vehicles (motor bicycles and motor tricycles). What you are missing is that only you is trying to limit this to pedal bicycles. Horizon originally said cycles. Not all human powered cycles have the balance and control issues you view as central to cycling.
Re: What is gr8 about motorcycling?
Bicycler wrote:I think the clue in the phrase 'electrical assistance' is the word 'assistance'. I think we can draw a line between a battery backup used to assist a primarily human powered vehicle and a vehicle which requires no human propulsion.
Yeah... I think the word assistance isn't really of much use. On max assistance on a lot of bikes it's anything but, in reality you're controlling the speed of the bike by how fast you turn the pedals, in essence they become a sort of 'rotary throttle'.
Bicycler wrote:I repeat that it is this human propulsion which defines cycling for me. I could swap my bikes for tricycles, handcycles or pedal cars and when riding I would still in my mind be doing the same activity.
What about vehicles with no wheels? (For example a paddle boat) Do they count?
Personally I think you open more wormy cans with your definition than simply saying anything that has a motor doesn't count.
Bicycler wrote:What you are missing is that only you is trying to limit this to pedal bicycles. Horizon originally said cycles. Not all human powered cycles have the balance and control issues you view as central to cycling.
Did he? Fair enough. If which case we're talking about the motive mechanism and so can rule out everything with a motor and I'm happy to concur.