Re: Shimmy in front suspension questionProject Magnet #1 <test_spamgourmet@cox,net > wrote:
> The LTD's had a great, comfortable riding position, much better than the
> KZ series they replaced.
I wouldn't argue.
>Handling was better too,
I would argue. Different weight distribution, rearward weight bias,
bloody silly tyre choice.
>I had both at the same
> time. The LTD never gave any hint of shimmy or wobble, under any
> conditions, including hitting small animals at 70+ mph.
Hitting an animal at 70+ and not falling off is not a test of good
handling. *Avoiding* the animal might have been. Pitching the thing into
a bumpy bend at 70+ is a better test.
>
> The only thing my LTD didn't handle well was a '64 Ford Galaxy 500 at 30
> mph.
>
> I assume, since you talk bad about the LTD's, that you had a bad
> experience with one or more. I'd believe it was either from wear or
> other issues, not due to the design. I'd never heard anyone that had an
> LTD complain about the handling until now. Everyone I knew loved theirs.
You take a conventional roadster bike, bolt a fat 16" wheel on the back,
fit a stepped seat, change the weight distribution, and fit fucking
great cowhorn bars - you compromise the handling. Fact.
I like some cruisers, but there isn't a cruiser out there that I've
tried that handles remotely as well as a half-decent sports bike (the
benchmark for good handling), with the possible exception of a Moto
Guzzi California.
Try one of them and you'll understand the meaning of "good handling
cruiser".
Ditch the rose-tinted specs.
--
BMW K1100LT 750SS CB400F CD250 CB125 SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....