| Author | Message | ||
     Wardan123 |
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Custom-Built-Motorcycles-buell-Custom-Mutant-Buell-Radical-CrossBreed-Must-See_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ10062QQitemZ4635027853QQrdZ1  | ||
| Kdan |
But it handles like a sport bike! And my ass feels like Jessica Alba's...Go ahead, touch it and see. I don't like it. | ||
| Natexlh1000 |
Wow. Really dumb description. UGLY and HEAVY too. I want the "useless parts" he threw away. | ||
| Seth |
There's such little cornering clearance, you wouldn't even need to put the kickstand down to park the thing  | ||
| Seth |
The worse thing is that some fool is going to see this monstrosity on the road and think it's one of Buell's new product lines. | ||
| Natexlh1000 |
No... if they're that stupid, they won't know what the tank logo is. | ||
| Jackbequick |
Hideous! Look at the footpeg, seat, and handlebar locations. It looks like you knees would be up against your elbows, your chest against the tank, and your butt jammed up against that seat. Jack | ||
| Buellmonkey |
Why are we the only country that dumbs down its technology? Haven't Americans invented a lot of the technology in use today (a lot, not all of it)? But yet we continue to either parcel it out to someone else, give it away, let it be taken or denigrate it. I'm all for custom anything but I used to think it was about making a possession (this case a motorcycle) uniquely your own. Why is there such a slew of stupid, ugly, unrideable motorcycles out there? It's now ALL show and no go but the dim masses seem to perceive that having a shiny, stretched, chromed and LOUD bike as THE status symbol. It's nothing original, even less of a performance machine than a vacuum cleaner without wheels. Doesn't anyone out there think real technology beautiful? | ||
| Brucelee |
"Why are we the only country that dumbs down its technology? " why is it that we love to generalize? | ||
| Jlnance |
It's now ALL show and no go but the dim masses seem to perceive that having a shiny, stretched, chromed and LOUD bike as THE status symbol. Well I think you hit the nail on the head. A motorcycle is a status symbol. A shiny stretched cromed loud bike will get you laid. There is a lot more money in selling sex than there is selling just about anything else. | ||
| Mfell2112 |
Anybody that chops up Buells should be jailed. Also, to see those inverted forks on this bike is a waste. I could use them on my Cyclone. Regards mike | ||
| Buellmonkey |
Name a country that LIKES to, not has to, use outdated technology. As a world power we have the luxury to be stupid and slack if we want to be but I don't see any other nation following our lead. We have the highest obesity rate of any nation, dwindling test scores, though we actually work more than any other nation. It's PEOPLE who make up those statistics not machinery. I agree a motorcycle can be a status symbol but I question the validity of certain motorcycles that now have this exaggerated value when only 15 years ago, they were biker shit built by morons. Has anything changed? Has any of these "builders" actually made anything to make a bike perform reasonably better or have they made a (custom) bike nicer looking? (I'm excluding companies like Baker or S&S or other inventors not remodelers). And a shiny bike won't get you laid, money will. Sex sells anything. Put a pair of t*ts on any product and it will skyrocket in value; ergo - the chopper. Sh*t is sh*t no matter how much you shine it. The chopper, as an incarnation, is a show bike not a performance bike, no matter what exaggerated cube engine you stuff into it. To me, that's the dumbing down of technology. | ||
| Bartimus |
 | ||
| Buellmonkey |
 | ||
| Buellriderm2 |
Buellmonkey, What do you think of this one then?  | ||
| Buellriderm2 |
 | ||
| Buellriderm2 |
 | ||
| Buellriderm2 |
 | ||
| Metalstorm |
That bike (the first one) would get me laid for sure. Laid out on a stretcher after the very first high speed corner attempt.  | ||
| Glitch |
Looks like you'd have to stop, back up, and start again to go around the curves on either of those bikes. | ||
| Paulson |
Real-world riding performance aside, this bike is MUCH more interesting than some of the others we've had the priviledge of viewing. More creative, I think. | ||
| Buellmonkey |
I think both bikes have beautiful parts to them. My original post had nothing to do with the "looks" of the bike. Hell, even the shit that comes out of O.C.C. has some visual appeal. My rant had everything to do with how "show bikes" (my term) perform. My argument was as to why anyone would put in a performance engine in a non-performance frame (chopper). Yes, someone will argue the point of "performance" being relative and "beauty" as being "subjective" but we can all conclude the most basic answer would be, "because I can". This also doesn't mean that a niche market wouldn't arise from this kind of "style" (which it has) and/or the "value" of this kind of motorcycle wouldn't skyrocket (which it has) and idiots galore wouldn't flock to it. My contention is to WHY this has any advantage in any WAY other than it being "COOL". "Cool" is also subjective but to me, "cool" should be something more than one: the obvious and two: something anyone can do. We like sport figures, models, artists, you name it, because they supersede the ordinary and therefore become the extra-ordinary. Returning to my point, putting in a fast engine in a non-peforming chassis defeats the (basic) purpose of the motorcycle, which is to be driven. (To me, that's "dumbing down". You could also argue the point that this kind of bike can go real fast in a straight line, which I would agree to, but you could get a drag bike to do that and do it better.) If it's going to be a "show" bike then you don't need a fast engine. And, if it's going to be a "fast" bike, then the looks become irrelevant. Form follows function, remember? You could marry the two principles and get a plethora of Italian bikes, but you wouldn't get a chopper. All the "classic" cars and motorcycles of their day were beautiful AND performed well (fast). A chopper is neither but I will give it credit for being hand-made and individual. | ||
| Lake_bueller |
I love the shifter on that second bike. Way too cool!!! | ||
| Typeone |
Buellriderm2, got any pics of that bike from the front? crazy smooth lines in that thing, very well done. love the color scheme too. | ||
| Buellriderm2 |
Thanks Lake Bueller, much appreciated. Thanks too Typeone, here's a front angle. I smoothed out a set of stock XB9S trees before powdercoating them. Just for point of arguement here too. This bike was a totalled 2003 XB9R that had t-boned a car with just 2300 miles on the clock. By the time I bought it, it had been in a salvage yard for over a year. I got ahold of new front end bits and a wheel and that's it.  | ||
| Buellriderm2 |
Buellmonkey, I make my living in the Buell "chopper" industry and honestly there are bunch of reasons this type of bike has been popular and successful to this point, almost none of which has anything to do with someone's specific desire to put Buell's "performance" engines into chopper frames, or to dumb down any technology (which actually seems like a bit of an oxymoron when we're talking about supposed sport bikes that run engines more akin to old tractors then true modern sportbikes). At any rate, for the most part this is a matter of economics. Though a great motorcycle, the Buells have struggled to retain even a fraction of the re-sale value their Harley cousins enjoy and thus they are the lowest-buck option when someone is looking to get into a custom. I can buy two rideable, unwrecked late model M2's for the price of one S&S Evo Big Twin crate engine, getting the wheels, brakes and front end and of course primary and transmissions I can also use at the same time, saving thousands on trying to start from scratch on a big twin custom. And on top of this, because of Buell's sporting pedigree these parts are all much better quality than if you were to use a same year Sportster. This is the boat most of my customers are in. Maybe they're young or just a blue collar working stiff who wants a chopper or custom of their own and the Buell donor option is really their only option financially. When you can build a really cool H-D powered bike for 8 to 10 thousand dollars it's a pretty attractive thing. Forget that you're tearing apart a supposed sporting motorcycle to do it. For some other like me the decision comes out of boredom and disappointment. The 1999 M2 I built my very first Mutant out of I bought brand new back when I was in school. It had 108 rwhp courtesy of a full built NRHS 1250 engine, and a bunch of other trick goodies and I couldn't even get anyone get anyone to give me $5500 for it back in 2004. I was going to buy an XB12, but honestly when I saw that my bike with over $5000 worth of extras wasn't going to even bring much more than book I said forget it, I'm doing something else. I love Buells for what they are, but if I want a sportbike, truthfully there are better machines out there for less money that don't depreciate any faster. | ||
| Thansesxb9rs |
Justin, Sorry I couldn't stay very long and hangout at FD's. Hey when Steet Chopper comes out say hi for me, until last September I worked for their parent company, great chopper mag. A bunch of us KC guys will be in Colorado in August, we'll give you a call and try to hook up and hit the twisties. You guys say you couldn't corner the above bikes, I bet Ferris could hang with most of you all on one of the above bikes in the twisties, if he can do it on a road king then it can be done on the above. | ||
| Diablobrian |
The chain shifter is an elegant solution to the problem of funky linkages. Good Job! | ||
| Buellmonkey |
If I sound harsh, I apologize. I don't want to offend anyone with my opinions, which are mine alone and certainly not the gospel or god's truth. I have been in a similar situation as yours (Buellriderm2) trying to make something better out of something else. (My own predicament was trying to make an American Cafe Racer out of a Sportster (not a streetfighter like Buell did with success). I spent too much money on a project I couldn't finish and now I have half a bike no one wants. My endeavor, as naive and stupid as it sounds as I write this, was to IMPROVE the Sportster, lighten the bike because it's too big for one person and not big enough for two. I always liked the British parallel twins with the Featherbed frame and I thought well why can't America make a light fast bike? (This is before Buell came out with his M/S series.) I give Buell a lot of credit for bucking the trend of longer, fatter, slower bikes that Harley puts out but that is my own misconception of what people want. Harley wouldn't be as successful as it is if they didn't know the market and what people "want". I just don't happen to agree to it. As for the "performance" engine remark I made earlier, that was in context to a chopper having a big, torquey engine. I know the engine (the chopper's and Harley's and Buell's) are "tractor" engines by any stretch of the definition but I don't understand why it has to be this way. If anything, I probably torture myself over something I know I can't change or won't change by itself. The irony for me is that my dad was a mechanic and I don't know shit about engines or pretty much anything mechanical and here I am now as a middle-aged man wanting to tear things apart and rebuild them. I have two art degrees and I would never be the one to tell you what you do or like to do is uncreative. Hell, I love it when anyone has a creative thought and can implement it. I may not agree with you on style or purpose but that's just personal taste. I wish you all the luck in the world. If you're in the market for a decent used bike for your next project bike, PM me. | ||
| Jersey_thunder |
IMO, it's not the building of the choppers...some are sweet..it's the destruction of a classic, that's a waste. JT | ||
| Lake_bueller |
If I can find a cheap salvage bike this fall, I'll think about building up a chopper like Justin's. If not, then I'll look into a DRZ400 with a moto set-up. |
