Speed3Chris
I like Dick
They are beautiful wheels. Love 'em on Lach's ride.There is a set of Carrozzeria on ebay now wish i had the extra cash look like they come with every thing needed to put them on .bid is less than $1500 so far.
They are beautiful wheels. Love 'em on Lach's ride.There is a set of Carrozzeria on ebay now wish i had the extra cash look like they come with every thing needed to put them on .bid is less than $1500 so far.
Evil Knievel, sorry your thread has been hi-jacked, it just sort of evolved. :wave:
Vulcan has about a hundred power weight penalty compared to the bonnie.As for the original question;
Isn't the Vulcan pretty similar to a bone stock Bonnie in HP and Tq? I believe I've seen HP numbers around 64..?
And I'd think slightly more weight..?
So, from the number, I'd think the Bonneville should have a slight advantage given riders of similar weight and riding ability - but that the difference would not not be huge... Anyone..?
Indeed, the very reason I bought the bike was because 'I LIKED THE LOOK OF IT.'\
not anyone and ride that fast in a stright line thats not true strange things happen at very high speed not everyone has the balls to do it.See how fast you want to stay on a naked bike you might change your mind.Dont take it as i mean to talk down road raceing that takes skill and balls to .hanging onto a drag bike or a salt bike takes skill to.To me fast is when you cant hear the motor running and the wind pins your shield to your nose,no feeling on earth like it.You know your ass is on the line then if you mess up you die.
lol Its not a Flat tracker or cafe its a mikey bikey lol
I would love to race on a track like that and go those speeds. I am alot better rider than most of you have given me credit for. Remember, I started out racing dirt bikes! I would challenge any who think they could keep up my pace on equal bikes. Smaller tighter roads dont make your bike faster...its just an illusion with lots of G forces.You still need the power in the straight-aways to get ahead of your apponent.
I have read this thread with interest and thought I'd add my take on the whole 'need more speed' issue for what it's worth.
I bought my Bonnie approximately a month ago after nearly 25 years of non bike ownership. It's a 2004 T100 and apart from the AI removal by the previous owner, it's completely stock.
And you wanna know something? I F***ing love it just the way it is.
I'm having no cravings to go faster... I'm not looking at the bike thinking I don't like the look of this and I don't like the look of that. Indeed, the very reason I bought the bike was because 'I LIKED THE LOOK OF IT.'
I'm no novice rider or a stranger to fast bikes, I spent 15 years of my life racing everything from RD125's to Yamaha 500 power valves in the 1980's, but I didn't buy my Bonnie to replicate those days.
I took her out yesterday for about 4 hours around the country roads of Lincolnshire and the bike performed flawlessly. She was forgiving when I didn't quite get it right round the twisties and not a single vehicle passed me all afternoon. There was more than enough power to get out of trouble when the need arose and I actually quite like the sound it makes with stock exhausts. I got off the bike, put her away in the garage and spent the rest of the day walking around with a stupid grin on my face, the same stupid grin I have every time I finish riding her.
I love looking at all the pics of what you've all done with your Bonnie and can appreciate the time and effort that has gone into making them truly original, but if it's ok with the forum members, I think I'll stick with what I've got and love it for what it is...
Here you go Sweat,
People tend to love it or hate it, but it's just what I envisaged and it does what I want it to.
I have taken a bit of weight out of mine. There is weight and also perception of weight and the good news is the bonnie feels pretty light to ride with its low CG. The Thruxton feels even lighter and is a bit lighter mostly because of its wheels. Taking meaningful weight out, means changing the wheels, eliminating or reducing fender size, losing the airbox and maybe a few other small things.Well, I for one, love it. Great looking bike and I love the weight reduction. I'm not it need of a lot of power, but getting the wieght down, that's something I could go for in a bike like this. Weren't original Bonnevilles around 400 lbs.? The one thing that disappointed me when I started looking into getting a Bonny was the weight, though it is about 50 or 60 pounds lighter than my old 1200 Sportster.
That's right...there is no load on the frame at all. It can be safely removed. I failed to insert the word engine. As you may know, in modern aluminum motorcycle frame designs, the engine is an integral part of the frame structure. What this does is shed further weight because the engine acts as part of the frame. The bonneville doesn't have this design and hence it is harder to get the bike weight down.a non load bearing frame?? really??
Sal,+1 Chris however I disagree slightly as the power is delivered much differently. Its not just faster, its quite different. That sport bike is turning 12,000 rpms to do that. I am not a big fan of motors which just have peaky top end power, as in many sport bikes, but find it a bit more enjoyable to feel the rush of power at lower rpms too. Thats a very common preference by the way and the reason many ditch those sportbikes after playing with them.
First sentence was an attempt at humor and hence the wink." The steel frame on these bikes is kind of heavy and hard to avoid and not designed as load bearing."
??????????????????
First sentence was an attempt at humor and hence the wink.
I stated it pretty succinctly. Can't help you beyond that...lol.
Have you been drinking this morning?