Hi all, Inspired by seeing a listing on Fleabay for a modified Royal Enfield Interceptor I thought I would ask a question that I have never asked anyone before about something that has always puzzled me and I would like to know the reasoning behind it....... Why would you take a bike with rear shocks and a swinging arm and then remove them and make the bike a 'hardtail'? I would have thought that removing rear suspension would have meant poorer handling, road holding and much less comfort therefore meaning a more dangerous and less comfortable bike. I have never really gotten the whole 'chopper' and 'Bobber' thing to be honest as, not being a motorcycle engineer I prefer to leave it to the experts at the factory to decide what constitutes a good road going motorcycle and will typically restrict myself to cosmetics and paintwork if I do anything at all to the machine.
I thought that might be the case Jez although I have to say that I don't really go with the 'double cool' bit as I always think of choppers, bobbers and hardtails as looking kind of frail, weak and somehow girly. Kind of more 'daddy long legs' than 'tarantula' to use a spider analogy.
My wife thought the Bobber looked 'cool' when she saw it in the flesh but, when I sat on it she realised how teeny tiny and puny it actually was. To me it felt like I was perched on top of a space hopper I wasn't impressed. The only one of the badass American Chopper wannabe's that actually didn't look like a toy with me on it was the Rocket III but that one just isn't me as I've never been 'cool'. Now, if they took the design of my 790 Bonnie and scaled it up a bit... say six to twelve inches longer and maybe two inches taller and bunged a two litre version of the 360 degree parallel twin into it then that would be a bike I could really get onboard with! Could you imagine the roar of a beast like that with the correct pipes on?!
I must be the same miserable Old School biker too then Jez! Other than the ‘odd’ one I can’t stand the office workers first attempt to create a ‘ crap new ploughing a field’ look with new tools bought for them by their spouses!
Personally i love the hardtail look spent most of my riding life on a hardtail...well up until my mid 40s and then had a couple of swing arms and i would think nothing of riding 300miles unfortunately i have never experienced a softail like the bobber but love the look still very much like the form over function approach but like to have the best of both worlds...only started riding again due to inheriting my mates hardtail and rebuilding it but didn't want to change the overall look too much due to it being a true survivor custom from the 70s. Shame the custom look has been adopted by the white collar high disposable income trendy's as that's not what custom is about its true individuality and creativity and you cant by that so DD here is a pic of my dog taking a shit. My grandson likes it!
I knew there was something odd about you when you didn't eat your tomatoes and mushrooms which came with your "full English" in that cafe in Chipping Norton.
I can appreciate the love and effort that goes into creating them but I can't really understand them. For me the art is making form and function work in perfect harmony. The Cafe racer such as the Triton fits that bill much better for me. It is a beautiful creation but that beauty is all in the pursuit of maximum function. The standard Bonneville also fits that bill for me. The damn things, whether it be a 1959 or a 2001 or a 2014 are goddamn beautiful just the way they rolled off the production line but also function perfectly. Handling, grunt, comfort and looks are all in balance.
Don't get the idea that hardtails/chops/lowriders dont handle as some do and just as well as the older swing arm frame designs granted its no contest with modern geometry and shocks etc but comfort is definitely not on the menu.
That pub where @MadMrB has marked gets pretty busy with bikes when the suns out on weekends! Great food too but sit outside though!
I like the bobber look when done proper (as in not gaudy). I like the hard tail look, but don't think I'd like riding one. I like the soft tail look and my 2001 V Star 1100 had that look. It did look and ride great -up to about 60 mph. After that, the ride was crap -it would vibrate your fillings out. Had nothing to do with it being a soft tail.
I've built and ridden a few hardtaiks in my younger days. But honestly they're pretty horrible and impractical. I'm not a fan of the bibber either nor the new Rocket..both look To my eye as though someone's stuck a sofa castor on the back of the bike rather than a rear end.Each to their own I know ...but that's my view.
I'm another who doesn't like the bobber look. To me it's a bike for fashion victims, the design arguably makes the bike less practical, and doesn't improve it in any way apart from the looks (Even that's debatable) I can understand that the Daytonas aren't the most practical, but the form follows the function of going fast. The Sprints are a compromise between speed, comfort and luggage carrying ability, the Trophy was all about carrying the most as comfortably as possible, and the others had some practicality, but when you get to the bobber and cruisers you're making a bike less practical just for aesthetics and I don't like that.
I was beaten over the quarter mile by a 70 year old hardtail last weekend. John Hobbs ran 10.72 to my Street Triple's 10.80.
They were all "Hard Tail's" originally !! My 1942 BSA M20 handled like it was on rails ! This was on 20 inch by 1 & 1/4 inch wide tyre's ! It all depends on the geometry , weight and speeds ! Up to 70 MPH it was awesome ! I could lock the throttle on and steer by butt hands OFF !
