From: fdvlba@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Fort Davis VLBA site)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.moto.harley
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:13:21 GMT
Organization: National Radio Astronomy Observatory, Socorro NM

>steve@bucolix.ncsu.edu (Steve Garnier) writes:

>>fdvlba@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Fort Davis VLBA site) writes:
>>>laszlo@eclipse.cs.colorado.edu (Laszlo Nemeth) writes...
>>>thanks i always wanted to be a zanie. i am anti rec.motorcycles.harley
>>>i am not anti rec.motorcycles.cruiser but people that want the harley
>>>group are anti rec.motorcycles.cruiser because that would let in bikes
>>>that are "similar" to harleys.

>>I want the harley group.  I am not against .moto.cruiser.  Probably wouldn't
>>read it, I don't like the cruiser style or feel.
>>
>>I have an HD motorcycle.  It is not a cruiser, with wire wheels, high bars, 
>>twin chrome pipes, etc.  Cruisers were invented by the Japanese.  The cruiser 
>                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>look is an attempt at HD styling.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>You are correct on the second highlighted sentence, but incorrect on the
>first highlighted sentence.  If anything, your second sentence supports the
>assertion that Harley defined "cruiser styling", which is the absolute
>truth.  Perhaps this all comes down to our individual definitions/concepts
>of exactly what a "cruiser" is.  It might prove difficult to define for a
>charter; then again, maybe not.

If I am right that the cruiser look is an attempt at HD styling, then how
can I be wrong that the Japanese invented it?  The cruiser look started as
a harley\british style attempt, the Yamaha 650 Special twin. 

The point here is that I don't regard my bike as a cruiser, and would not
post to .cruisers about it.


>>Most aftermarket suppliers cater to either the J or HD market, with little
>>crossover.  The  reality of the market is that the consumer groups are 
>>separate demographically (different tastes). 

>Last time I looked into a Dennis Kirk catalog, *many* of the products were
>divided into marque subdivisions for the sake of consumer simplicity, but
>*many* of the suppliers sourced parts for *all* marques.  Yes, there are
>suppliers who source for only Harley.  One can find many small suppliers
>in almost any motorcycle magazine.  There are also major manufacturers who 
>supply exhaust systems for Viragos/Shadows/Vulcans/Inturders *AND* Harleys,
>as well as sprockets, chain, chrome, handlebars, highway pegs, etc.  The
>fact is that motorcyclists are demographically more similar than they are
>different, especially with respect to non-motorcyclists.>

I also have a Dennis Kirk catalogue.  Can't get sprockets for HD there.
So what?  My point is still valid; the consumer groups are different.
Look in any HD shop, then *any* other.  You can't deny the different
tastes in clothing, riding gear, etc.  Still beside the point.
The fact is that the harley list is large enough to have the readership
limited; I can't get on.  The demand exists.  Any whining about the loss to
rec.mc ignores this.


>>When a person makes up their mind to buy a Harley-David>on, they have decided
>>to forgo having the fastest, quickest handling bike available.  Expense is
>>also less of a concern.  These are the two dominant themes in rec.mc...
>>whose bike is faster, or where the cheapest X is.  It really is a different
>>mindset, where faster is not better.

>Interesting.  I ride a '79 Yamaha XS1100SF with 157,000 miles, lots of 
>chrome, foglamps, and shaft-drive.  Since I'm a PhD student and lack the
>money, I haven't been able to replace its third exhaust system.  I have a
>5 1/2 month old baby girl, so money is very important to me.  While cost
>is an important parameter, I find that quality is cheaper in the long run.

So what?  As I said, one of the dominant themes in .mc is expense.  I should
have said 'where faster and cheaper is not better'.  The point here is the
different mindset.   

>I ride year-round, just as I did when I lived in the midwest.  I also note
>a *lot* of posts from people who own "cruising" bikes, and who don't care
>squat about who's bike is fastest/quickest/sexiest/mostneon, as well as a
>*lot* of posts about BMWs.  I disagree with your assessment of "dominant
>themes" in rec.motorcycles.

Your disagreement is noted.  As I have said before, I am not against .cruisers,
.BMW, .Honda, etc.  If the demand is there, so mote it be.  There are too many
posts (of *any* kind) to rec.mc, with little meat between the bones. 
Offloading this bandwidth to apropriate groups seems logical.  Obviously the
establishment of .harley by itself is stepping on too many toes.  I propose
the establishment of companion subgroups, such as rec.moto.yam, .honda, etc.
This seems the equitable solution, and would make rec.moto leaner and at the
same time more universal, with hardware specific poop pigeonholed properly.

Good luck w/the exhaust and new family...


__
Steve Cowell, Site Tech, VLBA, Fort Davis, TX.........883.....................
Newsgroups: news.groups