Author |
Message |
Old_man
| Posted on Saturday, April 05, 2008 - 11:30 pm: |
|
I was watching American Thunder. They visited Harley design. Hanging on the wall among many Harley designs was a picture of an old Vincent twin. Now that was a beautiful motorcycle. It seems they at Harley design respect it too. I wish they would emulate it more. No do-das there. |
Natexlh1000
| Posted on Sunday, April 06, 2008 - 11:29 am: |
|
I would really love to see an XLCR redone for 2009. I want to see stainless Siamese pipes! |
P47b
| Posted on Sunday, April 06, 2008 - 04:32 pm: |
|
Hey Old_man, http://www.vincentstreamliner.com/ I have to say this is the greatest guy I have ever met. Every thing he has done is all hand made for this bike. All but the engines. Hands down he will have the land speed record for the vintage class for a long time. |
Bcordb3
| Posted on Sunday, April 06, 2008 - 07:54 pm: |
|
A thing of beauty.
|
P47b
| Posted on Sunday, April 06, 2008 - 08:53 pm: |
|
Yes
|
Crusty
| Posted on Sunday, April 06, 2008 - 08:53 pm: |
|
I have a friend who keeps a Black Shadow engine in his bedroom. He also keeps a Brough Superior SS 100 in his basement. They are two of the most beautiful motorcycles ever made (along with the '98 S3-T). |
Danger_dave
| Posted on Sunday, April 06, 2008 - 08:59 pm: |
|
Blah blah blah - how many of them are still on the road? Similar vintage Triumphs - still running strong - outnumber them ten to one. They are beautiful and realistic! :-P |
Danger_dave
| Posted on Sunday, April 06, 2008 - 09:02 pm: |
|
Pics of old dungers from the Classics fest are here: http://web.mac.com/david_cohen_design/Site/Photo_I ndex/Pages/08_Classics_Festival.html |
P47b
| Posted on Sunday, April 06, 2008 - 09:37 pm: |
|
Dang Dave, That was harsh. I have to agree that allot of them are used as mantelpieces. |
Bads1
| Posted on Sunday, April 06, 2008 - 10:11 pm: |
|
You want the Holy Grail ??? Then the 1939 Crocker would be it. Fetching upwards of 250 grand. |
Danger_dave
| Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 01:36 am: |
|
>>Dang Dave, That was harsh. << Let's get some spirit into the debate I say! |
Old_man
| Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 03:31 am: |
|
I didn't know that there was a debate. What are we debating? I never saw a Vincent in person. I understand that they were a rather expensive motorcycle. Not produced in many numbers as compared to the Triumph, BSA, and Norton. I've ridden those. |
Danger_dave
| Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 05:00 am: |
|
>>I didn't know that there was a debate. << All good - Triumph man trying to start one. I've ridden a Black Shadow. Very nice, and quite beautiful - but a lot of those old brit bikes have the gear selectors on the other side to today. I found it hard to get used to. And my old Triumphs used to beat them on the track too. :-) |
Danger_dave
| Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 05:53 am: |
|
PS - if you do want to know more about Vincents, my friend Derek is the man. http://web.onetel.net.uk/~djpeters/motorcycling/in dex.html I get quotes about the good Old Days off him. |
P47b
| Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 08:22 pm: |
|
I just got out of a rather hot debate on fuel pumps (station pumps) and not wanting to go any farther than what I know. I love the old Bikes. The farther back you go the bikes had more charisma than some of today’s bikes. I'm always impressed buy the oddball bikes that set you back and go how does that work. Triumph & Vincent did that with me. The one that I can't get over is the Suzuki RE5. It's so strange that no one will look at it. |
Danger_dave
| Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 08:54 pm: |
|
Yeah - I hang out in some Brit bike groups as well. My 'harsh' gambit would have gone over well there and got some 'Triumph's?? - they suck compared to a Vincent' type jibes back. Because they all would know that my statement was preposterous. Wrong audience. Vincent made some completely screwball bikes too. I'll dig out some pics later. |
Bads1
| Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 08:56 pm: |
|
I just got out of a rather hot debate on fuel pumps (station pumps) and not wanting to go any farther than what I know. And you can believe what you want.lol |
P47b
| Posted on Monday, April 07, 2008 - 11:47 pm: |
|
Ok Bads1
|
Mbsween
| Posted on Tuesday, April 08, 2008 - 12:16 am: |
|
Did you catch edward's recap of the last vincent test in this month's cycle world? They poo-pooed the handling in a major way. Something to the effect of "...the bike is dangerous to ride...." I've seen vincents, there were quite a few at AMA vintage days not that long ago, but never ridden one. So Dave, do they handle that bad? or were the cycle world folks of the day a bunch of wankers? |
Danger_dave
| Posted on Tuesday, April 08, 2008 - 03:31 am: |
|
I did 35mph in the burbs on the thing. I can't say. Derek makes no mention of handling irregularities. |
Crusty
| Posted on Tuesday, April 08, 2008 - 06:25 am: |
|
Vincent frames were designed over 60 years ago. How well do you expect them to handle? The one I rode didn't handle badly, but I wasn't about to try to push a bike that was built around the time I was born. By today's standards, it was slow, didn't handle and the brakes sucked. But it had charisma, in Spades! A modern Hyundai Tiburon will outperform a 1929 Rolls Royce; but it will never be considered in the same League. |
Tom_b
| Posted on Tuesday, April 08, 2008 - 08:20 am: |
|
well said crusty! People will probably say the same thing about buells in 60 yrs. |
Mbsween
| Posted on Tuesday, April 08, 2008 - 08:26 am: |
|
Crusty, The review was from the time period when the last Vincent rolled off the line. It was a modern bike at the time of the review. Edwards was quoting from it. |
Bads1
| Posted on Tuesday, April 08, 2008 - 01:07 pm: |
|
Did anyone read the write-up on the two 1939 Crockers's that were numbers 106 and 107. Very intersting read. (Message edited by bads1 on April 08, 2008) |