Going to the Dark Side
- Thread starter user 213
- Start date
Help Support Yamaha FJR Motorcycle Forum:
Well that was fun. Thread is quiet for 6 wks and then smart guy pipes in about how dim witted we must be and suddenly BAM .... 47 posts in two days.
And for the record, it's neither the CT nor the fuel cell that hampers the performance of the FJR. It's those dayum aux lights! Really screws the pooch when it comes to aerodynamics!
Also I'd like to add, I did read every post before deciding to go DS. 2 looong evenings ofinformative entertaining reading.
And for the record, it's neither the CT nor the fuel cell that hampers the performance of the FJR. It's those dayum aux lights! Really screws the pooch when it comes to aerodynamics!
Also I'd like to add, I did read every post before deciding to go DS. 2 looong evenings of
garyahouse
newbs need the forum
Why don't motorcycle manufacturers put CT's on bikes?
It is Interesting that so many have asked this question. Not sure that I've read EVERY post on this thread, but I'm reasonably certain nobody's attempted to answer this question. I don't pretend to KNOW the answer, but I think I might be able to come pretty close. First of all, l'm thinking about just what a manufacturer must do to market and sell equipment.
Three important factors
Motorcycles are, and always have been, all about performance. Anything that produces better performance must be balanced against at least three things: cost, weight, and safety. There may well be other factors. If that be true, then the car tire is a problem in all three areas. First, it costs more. Now I'm guessing here, as my Exalto cost ME more than many motorcycle tires would cost. But I'm guessing that at a manufacturer's price point, they're cheaper. After all, a CT weighs something like 10 lbs more than a MC tire. That weight is made of expensive materials. Seems to me that the MT would be cheaper for a manufacturer to put on. I'm thinking that the rear suspension would need to be upgraded to efficiently handle the added unsprung weight. And speaking of weight, which is the second factor, more weight equals less performance. My seat of the pants comparison (is anybody EVER going to test a CT equipped FJR on a dyno?) tells me that the bike loses perhaps 5 hp from installing the CT. I could feel the difference when I first made the switch, and though it was very slight, others have confirmed this on this forum. To me, this is insignificant. But to a manufacturer, this weight is seriously bad news, not only does it affect acceleration, but it's got to have an effect on suspension compliance. For me, i't a non issue, but for the manufacturer of a sport/touring bike this HAS to matter. They KNOW that people can and will refuse to buy a machine that doesn't make as much power as the competition, even if it's just a small amount. And when it comes to just how much effect a heavy tire has on suspension compliance, I'm no expert. But it would seem that this would be a huge factor. MT tires are made to be as light as possible for a reason. For me, riding a large, heavy motorcycle around relatively smooth corners at reasonable speeds negates this issue. But for a manufacturer, building thousands of bikes that must travel a zillion miles on every type of road without issue matters. It matters financially as well as legally. What if a fella ran over a 2 inch ridge with one side of a CT and it caused the bike to lurch to one side? I know my CT will do this. Can you spell L-A-W-S-U-I-T? Again, for me, it's a non issue, but for a manufacturer...
Which leads me to say, safety is an issue as well. Motorcycle manufacturers have certainly considered darksiding their equipment. They have considered things we can't even imagine and more. They conduct extensive and expensive studies to determine what the buying public thinks they want. And as I've posted on this forum myself, most people THINK that CT's are dangerous on a motorcycle; even people who know little or nothing about motorcycles. It would take nothing for a manufacturer to mount up a CT on a bike and machine test it under extreme conditions. I wonder if they already have. We already know how much punishment a good quality car tire can take. I'd be willing to bet it's happened, somewhere a dark corner of a factory where prying eyes can't see. But putting a CT on a motorcycle, because of public perception, would seem to be marketing suicide. The media would have a field day. Could irresponsible, immature riders get into trouble with a CT? Might these same people smell money through litigation in the event of a tip over? You bet. Do manufacturers know this? Duhhhh... The public, no doubt, would ridicule any such attempt, just as they do most of us on this thread. And from a manufacturing standpoint, whether or not a CT on an FJR is dangerous is not the question. How it would be perceived by the public, however, IS.
Give the public what they think they want
It just makes sense that a manufacturer, in order to stay in business, must shave every possible ounce, cut every possible dollar, give their product every possible horsepower, and avoid every possible decision that could cause a disbelieving public to criticize their marketing and design choices. Why don't manufacturers put CT's on motorcycles? There are a lot more things to consider than just the actual safety involved. As I posted before, it is my opinion that a CT is SAFER than a MT in some ways. But I'm thinking that the perceived safety is much more of a factor for any manufacturer. That being said, the FACT that a motorcycle manufacturer chooses not to put a CT on a bike is of no consequence to me. Feel free to correct me if you disagree, or if your research or common sense might prove otherwise.
Just a couple thoughts...
Gary
darksider #44
It is Interesting that so many have asked this question. Not sure that I've read EVERY post on this thread, but I'm reasonably certain nobody's attempted to answer this question. I don't pretend to KNOW the answer, but I think I might be able to come pretty close. First of all, l'm thinking about just what a manufacturer must do to market and sell equipment.
Three important factors
Motorcycles are, and always have been, all about performance. Anything that produces better performance must be balanced against at least three things: cost, weight, and safety. There may well be other factors. If that be true, then the car tire is a problem in all three areas. First, it costs more. Now I'm guessing here, as my Exalto cost ME more than many motorcycle tires would cost. But I'm guessing that at a manufacturer's price point, they're cheaper. After all, a CT weighs something like 10 lbs more than a MC tire. That weight is made of expensive materials. Seems to me that the MT would be cheaper for a manufacturer to put on. I'm thinking that the rear suspension would need to be upgraded to efficiently handle the added unsprung weight. And speaking of weight, which is the second factor, more weight equals less performance. My seat of the pants comparison (is anybody EVER going to test a CT equipped FJR on a dyno?) tells me that the bike loses perhaps 5 hp from installing the CT. I could feel the difference when I first made the switch, and though it was very slight, others have confirmed this on this forum. To me, this is insignificant. But to a manufacturer, this weight is seriously bad news, not only does it affect acceleration, but it's got to have an effect on suspension compliance. For me, i't a non issue, but for the manufacturer of a sport/touring bike this HAS to matter. They KNOW that people can and will refuse to buy a machine that doesn't make as much power as the competition, even if it's just a small amount. And when it comes to just how much effect a heavy tire has on suspension compliance, I'm no expert. But it would seem that this would be a huge factor. MT tires are made to be as light as possible for a reason. For me, riding a large, heavy motorcycle around relatively smooth corners at reasonable speeds negates this issue. But for a manufacturer, building thousands of bikes that must travel a zillion miles on every type of road without issue matters. It matters financially as well as legally. What if a fella ran over a 2 inch ridge with one side of a CT and it caused the bike to lurch to one side? I know my CT will do this. Can you spell L-A-W-S-U-I-T? Again, for me, it's a non issue, but for a manufacturer...
Which leads me to say, safety is an issue as well. Motorcycle manufacturers have certainly considered darksiding their equipment. They have considered things we can't even imagine and more. They conduct extensive and expensive studies to determine what the buying public thinks they want. And as I've posted on this forum myself, most people THINK that CT's are dangerous on a motorcycle; even people who know little or nothing about motorcycles. It would take nothing for a manufacturer to mount up a CT on a bike and machine test it under extreme conditions. I wonder if they already have. We already know how much punishment a good quality car tire can take. I'd be willing to bet it's happened, somewhere a dark corner of a factory where prying eyes can't see. But putting a CT on a motorcycle, because of public perception, would seem to be marketing suicide. The media would have a field day. Could irresponsible, immature riders get into trouble with a CT? Might these same people smell money through litigation in the event of a tip over? You bet. Do manufacturers know this? Duhhhh... The public, no doubt, would ridicule any such attempt, just as they do most of us on this thread. And from a manufacturing standpoint, whether or not a CT on an FJR is dangerous is not the question. How it would be perceived by the public, however, IS.
Give the public what they think they want
It just makes sense that a manufacturer, in order to stay in business, must shave every possible ounce, cut every possible dollar, give their product every possible horsepower, and avoid every possible decision that could cause a disbelieving public to criticize their marketing and design choices. Why don't manufacturers put CT's on motorcycles? There are a lot more things to consider than just the actual safety involved. As I posted before, it is my opinion that a CT is SAFER than a MT in some ways. But I'm thinking that the perceived safety is much more of a factor for any manufacturer. That being said, the FACT that a motorcycle manufacturer chooses not to put a CT on a bike is of no consequence to me. Feel free to correct me if you disagree, or if your research or common sense might prove otherwise.
Just a couple thoughts...
Gary
darksider #44
Last edited by a moderator:
Optimal is not always ideal for every rider. Liability is the main reason you will never see any organization saying in a public format that running a CT on a bike is ok/safe/etc.
I'm not sure I agree with the statement that bike tires are made as light as possible. Their weight is a function of their intended performance envelope.
Yes, I would agree, the CT loses Hp on the Dyno. Simple physics of greater unsprung mass requiring more energy to spin up to speed. Same for working the shock harder, more unsprung mass/weight to manage. The typical aftermarket shock is up to it better than the oem ones, imho. I did not notice a need to rebuild any sooner with the aftermarket shock. But it really wakes you up when you put a CT on a bike with a worn shock.
Most people that get all upset about the CT on a bike don't understand how car tires are made. They cry about how the moto tires are round and the car tires are more squared off. Take a look at the following picture of a car tire section. You will notice that the only part of the tire that is squared off is the rubber outer layer. The steel and arimyd belts are all woven in a rounded shape, just like a bike tire.
TIRE CONSTRUCTION.jpeg
I'm not sure I agree with the statement that bike tires are made as light as possible. Their weight is a function of their intended performance envelope.
Yes, I would agree, the CT loses Hp on the Dyno. Simple physics of greater unsprung mass requiring more energy to spin up to speed. Same for working the shock harder, more unsprung mass/weight to manage. The typical aftermarket shock is up to it better than the oem ones, imho. I did not notice a need to rebuild any sooner with the aftermarket shock. But it really wakes you up when you put a CT on a bike with a worn shock.
Most people that get all upset about the CT on a bike don't understand how car tires are made. They cry about how the moto tires are round and the car tires are more squared off. Take a look at the following picture of a car tire section. You will notice that the only part of the tire that is squared off is the rubber outer layer. The steel and arimyd belts are all woven in a rounded shape, just like a bike tire.
TIRE CONSTRUCTION.jpeg
exskibum
~<>~<>~<>~<>~
Well, damn it! I KNEW you and I really couldn't have had much distance between our positions on this issue, . . . apparently NONE! I never said were nuts or wrong about a CT serving your needs or doing it safely; I just happen to know about lawyers. Hell, I could've written your sentence that I quoted here. So who owes whom a beer if or when we run into one another off the keyboard?
Last edited by a moderator:
exskibum
~<>~<>~<>~<>~
juniorfjr
Well-known member
On my recent trip to Mexico, we unloaded my bike at a Yamaha Dealer about a mile from Papa Chuey's. Smart ass kid salesman took one look at the car tire and proceeded to tell me how unsafe it was. My only response was "yea, you are right. It's been unsafe on this bike for 25,000 miles so far." Right over his head.
Last edited by a moderator:
odot
CC member # 17,----- DUP member # 7, mensa club m
I like how you guys slap each other on the back like good ol' boys when yer all in agreement. It's cute.
I am considering going DS....just need to find a place here in dfw that will do it. Means I have to ask around and stuff.
I am considering going DS....just need to find a place here in dfw that will do it. Means I have to ask around and stuff.
bgross
Recusant Infidel
"In the land of the blind, a one-eyed man is king."
I realize that this is an FJR board, but much of the recently dispensed "common sense" about CTs has been phrased as though the CT is a bad choice on ANY bike, ANY time, for ANY reason. So forgive me for addressing the CT in terms that are not specific to the FJR.
I have two bikes in my garage: an FJR and a Goldwing.
I'm on my second CT on my Wing - a relative noob. I am one of over 1000 riders on the Gl1800riders.com board who have come out of the closet about their "alternative lifestyle". The board sponsors have asked us to keep our discussion of The Darkside limited to a sub-forum in order to avoid the "liability" of appearing to endorse the practice. [liability is often an emasculated version where I make a personal choice and then get a shyster to make you pay - not because of any real danger, but because I didn't do my homework. I just listened to someone else.] We are a very active bunch.
The recent posts (above), attempting to educate us and help us to choose a more enlighten path (let's trot out the "experts" and "common sense") all sound familiar. Nothing that we haven't heard before and, as usual, not based upon personal experience.
As I often say on the Darksider sub-board, "Thousands of Darkside riders with tens (or hundreds) of millions of miles of ACTUAL EXPERIENCE - but what do we know?"
Please excuse our impatience. It's difficult for us when the 1000th person repeats the same erroneous blather. We're sure you mean well, but we're grown men and women - and not as ignorant as you seem to think.
"You'll shoot yer eye out, kid."
I realize that this is an FJR board, but much of the recently dispensed "common sense" about CTs has been phrased as though the CT is a bad choice on ANY bike, ANY time, for ANY reason. So forgive me for addressing the CT in terms that are not specific to the FJR.
I have two bikes in my garage: an FJR and a Goldwing.
I'm on my second CT on my Wing - a relative noob. I am one of over 1000 riders on the Gl1800riders.com board who have come out of the closet about their "alternative lifestyle". The board sponsors have asked us to keep our discussion of The Darkside limited to a sub-forum in order to avoid the "liability" of appearing to endorse the practice. [liability is often an emasculated version where I make a personal choice and then get a shyster to make you pay - not because of any real danger, but because I didn't do my homework. I just listened to someone else.] We are a very active bunch.
The recent posts (above), attempting to educate us and help us to choose a more enlighten path (let's trot out the "experts" and "common sense") all sound familiar. Nothing that we haven't heard before and, as usual, not based upon personal experience.
As I often say on the Darksider sub-board, "Thousands of Darkside riders with tens (or hundreds) of millions of miles of ACTUAL EXPERIENCE - but what do we know?"
Please excuse our impatience. It's difficult for us when the 1000th person repeats the same erroneous blather. We're sure you mean well, but we're grown men and women - and not as ignorant as you seem to think.
"You'll shoot yer eye out, kid."
Last edited by a moderator:
Yo Dot'ness, check out the HD shops. Mostly they don't care. The other option I found that worked most of the time was to walk the wheel into an Americas Tire or similar joint and say I needed a tire mounted for my side car/trike. They all seem to get the side car or trike would need a car tire, not a moto tire and can get their heads around that. Often they can not balance the tire though, so let them mount it and have the local moto place balance it. They will usually do the balance w/o much fuss.
@juniorfjr - My favorite response is to ask how many miles they have on their bike. Most of the time, I have more miles on the rear CT then they have on their bike. Pretty much ends the argument w/o you having to actually tell them they are a poseur.
@bgross - Yep, we see this every now and then. Sometimes we're nice, other times we dogpile. Amazing how many people want to discount actual, first hand, experience over what their neighbor's friend's, uncle Bob told their sister's BFF's boyfriend that rides a scooter.
odot
CC member # 17,----- DUP member # 7, mensa club m
Good info.....and then again.....who cares if it's balanced or not?
Redfish Hunter
Gone Fishing
odot
CC member # 17,----- DUP member # 7, mensa club m
Spoken like a true admin, fish.....
Last edited by a moderator:
odot
CC member # 17,----- DUP member # 7, mensa club m
This is reality in it's truest form. Been sayin' it for months now. He has the "gift".
OK. Just asked because I wondered. Even if I have baited & debated him in the past, I like & respect the guy, but I don't think that the powers that be really care what I think.
Last edited by a moderator:
odot
CC member # 17,----- DUP member # 7, mensa club m
Pup, if we were to have an election of all the probable peeps we see in this here forum.....for admin.....for me...it would be fish. He has tact. He can take a hit. He has no remorse. In other words.....he's stable. A guy that even beemerdon would turn too....(just kidding, fish). Only problem with fish?......him and patriot are buddies.....and I just hate that dude.(just kidding pat).
Wait, he sounds more like he's just stoned to the gills and loose as a goose! Hmm, actually, that would make for just about a perfect admin here!
Similar threads
Parts For Sale
Nomar classic tire changer and accessories
Parts For Sale
NoMar tire changer/balancer/accessories (Los Angeles)
