Letters
LETTERS
THE APRIL ISSUE
I have been a fervent reader of your great magazine since 1967 and a subscriber since 1969, and I just realized, after reading your April issue from cover to cover, that I have failed to write you a letter of appreciation for the informative and pleasurable experience I receive every month from your publication. Your Vincent supplement was especially rewarding; you cleared up a lot of vague notions and well established rumors that we cycle fanatics of the mid-Sixties had inculcated until now. Your “Scam” on AMA racing was the most complete and interesting that you have ever published, and I hope you will endeavor to use this format on a yearly basis.
DARIO G. PEDRAJO Miami, Fla.
KEEP IT UP
Keep up the great work on your mag; I think it’s the greatest going. Your road tests are the most efficient of all. They are filled with what the bike enthusiast likes to hear most.
MIKE HARRIS
Rocky Face, Ga.
ENJOYED MARCH ISSUE
I am writing this letter to comment on the superb information and the features you print in your magazine. I really enjoyed your 166-page March issue. The articles you print are very informative and the feature stories interesting. Keep up the good work.
PAUL JILIPOVICH Eucleth, Minn.
FORD’S BAD IDEA
A letter to Ford Motor Company:
February 8, 1971, on a network
television show, “Rowan and Martin’s Laugh-In,” your company presented a very offensive commercial, contrasting Ford quietness with motorcycle noise. As a two-wheeled enthusiast of some 15 years and a California motorcycle dealer for three, I must register a vehement objection to your advertising agency’s malicious stereotyping of our sport as simply “noisy.”
Let me add that responsible members of the motorcycle industry are attacking the noise problem directly. Soon, all amateur competition motorcycles will require muffled exhausts. Owners are being educated to leave their exhaust systems as the manufacturers designed them. An engineer here at the University of California at Davis is developing a combination spark arrester/muffler that will further quiet our woods and neighborhoods.
But what are you doing? Certainly noise may be offensive and its absence may sell cars. But has noise ever killed anybody? Can we say the same for massive automotive exhaust emissions?
While pondering these questions, please take that offensive commercial permanently off the air.
CHARLES E. CARROLL, III Davis, Calif.
“Mr. E.J. Rodgers Advertising Manager Television and Radio Ford Motor Company “Dear Mr. Rodgers:
“We of the motorcycle industry are at a disadvantage! We have no tight-fitting doors and windows to keep out the ear-shattering noise of Ford diesel trucks, the roar of Ford farm tractors, the high performance 'music' of an L I D, or the 'sound of the cat.'
(Continued on page 8)
Continued from page 6
“Noise and air pollution is everybody’s problem and even though the motorcycling public contributes far less than the automobile industry, we are in the midst of combating these environmental hazzards through technical, mechanical. and practical application policies. The answer is not 'to park in the middle of a desert and roll up the windows!'
“Many of us buy and use Ford products with the income we receive from our various motorcycle businesses. Your recent television commercial has created an unjust image which will reflect in our sales.
“I have a 'better idea,' and that is to strongly urge my employees, customers, friends, and members of the family to consider closely their next choice of automobile or truck."
Silently Yours, DIC K AINSWORTH
Kansas City, Mo.
COMMENTS ON BRAKING
I thoroughly enjoyed the enlarged March issue of CYCLE WORLD; please keep up the good work. I enjoyed the technical article, “Motorcycle Braking,” but I must point out two rather large errors which it contained; both were under the heading of “Weight Shift.”
First, the weight shift from rear wheel to front is not calculable by the method stated in the article, since this method does not take into account the moments (or torque) resulting from the braking forces at the wheels, and from the gravitational force on the vehicle’s center of mass.
There are two independent methods of correctly calculating wheel loads during deceleration, the easier of which is to consider the center of mass as having moved forward a distance equal to the deceleration rate (in g's) multiplied by the height of the center of mass above ground level, then going through the usual proportional beam method with this “effective” center of mass as though the vehicle were stationary. This yields the correct front and rear wheel loads of 502 and l c)4 lb. for figure 3 of the article, as does the alternate method. which entails evaluating the moments of all gravitational, braking, and inertial forces at any arbitrary point on the vehicle.
Next, it is an easy matter, using the authors’ data on the Honda CB750, to demonstrate that from the standpoint of maximum-front /mi ni mum-rear wheel loadings, this vehicle is most certainly capable of 1.45 g stops. Since the above is over the front tire patch (i.e., the motorcycle is just short of toppling over), with a distance between the front tire patch and the center of 24 in. (as stated in the text and used in calculation of the incorrect values in figure 3), the theoretical braking limit in g numbers is 40/24, or in excess of 1.6! This does not account tor compression ot the front suspension, or the possibility ot a lightweight rider making for a lower overall c.g., etc.
12)
(Continued on page 12)
Continued from page 8
My thanks to Stephenson and Habberstad for an interesting and objective article, the first I’ve seen ot its kind, but solutions to dynamic problems such as weight transfer are never as easy as they might appear. Please forward these gentlemen my address, and 1 will furnish them with a detailed analysis at their request.
CORNEL Ci. ORMSBY 350 W. 39th St.
San Bernardino, Calif.
As I read it, the article on braking in the March issue gets a little fuzzy on page 1 26.
You know, of course, that there are three kinds of friction: static, sliding and rolling. The authors seem to ignore rolling friction and draw some conclusions by comparing static and sliding friction, f he only way I can think of to go from static to sliding (in a braking mode) is to do what they suggest, l ie a rope on it and drag the bike with a car. 1 he proper area of concern is the change from rolling to sliding friction.
Use of the words dynamic and kinetic masks their meaning, but the text persuades me that the “dynamic” coefficient of 1.16 relates to sliding.
The conclusion that locking up the rear wheel is “normally the most efficient procedure in a straight-line stop” is startling. Particularly when the article starts out by observing (correctly) that maximum retardation occurs just before wheelsiide.
I think the point should have been that some riders can’t tell when the rear wheel is sliding, but if they can keep the machine straight, they'll stop.
The business about front-wheel lockup is even more startling. The inference is that because “kinetic” and static coefficients are close (evidently 1.2 and 1.16) the handling behavior of the bike doesn't change much when the front wheel is sliding, again assuming a straight-line stop. A sliding front tire won't steer, and any side force will put it off that magic straight line.
Given the choice between being able to steer while stopping quickest, or losing control while sliding farther, I’ll take stopping and steering. The bit about rapid locking and releasing of the front wheel is very astute aircraft antiskid systems work that way.
Explaining physical things in popular language is difficult, and the authors did well on the fundamentals. I don’t agree that wheelsiide is permissible either in front or back and the guy who does it for very long is out of control.
CARL SHIPMAN Albuquerque, N.M.
LESS SOUND, MORE GROUND
I have just posted the following letter to my local dealer in response to your Scene article in the May issue. Thanks, Mr. Wagar, for laying it on the line again.
Eve enclosed an article which / think you should read. It's from the May ’71 issue of CYCLE WORLD. There are some very cogent points about what you, as
(Continued on page 14)
Continued from page 12
dealer, and I, as buyer and rider, can do to prevent our (!) sport from being legislated into fourwheeled oblivion.
Please read it and take to heart its message about the threat of noise pollution. We all know the joys of riding. Can 7 we forsake some of the “joyful noise” in favor of better public relations and less legislative pressure? Anyway, what’s wrong with a quiet motorcycle?
Next time I come down to the shop, I’d love to see a big poster proclaiming, “Less Sound, More Ground, ” just as you see at the end of the article. I know you care. After all, motorcycling is your livelihood as well as avocation.
THOMAS EHMKE Bradner, Ohio
MECHANIC TRAINING
I read with interest a letter in your March issue from a Mr. Richter who was having difficulty getting training in Motorcycle Mechanics.
We at West Coast Training have for some time been training students in motorcycle and snowmobile repair and service. We have a constantly expanding correspondence course coupled to an in-shop training situation that has produced many competent mechanics.
We hope that your interest in providing more highly skilled mechanics for the motorcycling industry might result in your passing our name along to those interested.
HAZEL SHILEY President
West Coast Training Services l l 25 21 st St.
Milwaukie, Ore. 97222
DAYTONA’S FICKLE FINGER
The city of Daytona Beach must be hard up for cash. I happened to ride beyond some unmarked barrels on the beach. Looking over my shoulder, I saw a man in blue beckoning with his finger. He took my license away and began writing out a ticket. He said the ticket was for going beyond the barrels. I said that 1 was from out of town and that the barrels were unmarked. He then replied that it was illegal in that city to ride above the mean highwater mark. “You should have stopped by the courthouse and gotten a book of traffic ordinances and read it before doing anything else,” he snorted.
(Continued on page 16)
Continued from page 14
Now I ask you, are things that much different in senile city? I followed him to the station and they demanded $37 guilty plea or $42 bond. Not having either, I sat in jail for six hours until money could be wired from home. The court on Monday was packed with other cyclists in similar predicaments. Why don’t they charge admission to Daytona Beach instead of giving every motorcyclist a traffic ticket?
KEITH COLLINS
Tallahassee, Fla.
NEWTON’S LAW
In your January issue you answered Mr. Place’s letter (“Body English”) with, “ ... If the bike leans too far to the left, you can straighten it by moving your upper body to the left, which causes the bike to move right ...”
Shouldn’t it be vice versal
JOSEPH GUZZARDI Brooklyn, N.Y.
Paraphrasing Newton, every action is accompanied by an equal and opposite reaction, hence leftward upper body motion causes rightward motorcycle motion. This is the basis for many movements made in motorcycling on the pavement, in dirt racing or in trials. What may create your impression that things are vice versa is that after you have made a counter-movement, your body gradually recovers in the same direction as the machine; but this is caused by other factors that take over, such as steering, gyroscopic precession, etc. - Ed.
WANTS A V.O.C.
I enjoyed the special Vincent supplement in CYCLE WORLD’S April issue very much. Would you provide me with any information you have regarding details on a Vincent Owners Club near my locality or one on a national scale. I’ve owned a ’48 Shadow since ’66 and plan to keep it forever.
BOB BENEVICE 7 248 S. Talman Chicago, IL 60629
MORE ON EUROPE
After reading the Letters column in the April ’71 issue of CYCLE WORLD, I was prompted to write and say a few things on buying a bike in Europe and shipping it back.
The prices for a lot of the British bikes are about half the U.S. prices at the British dealers. Sometimes you might be able to buy direct from the factory.
When you are ready to come back, the dealer should be able to ship it for you and save you some trouble. It would be a good idea to end your trip in Europe back at the dealer, so you can have the bike serviced and/or checked before shipping it. And when you ship your bike, don’t forget to get full
coverage insurance with no deductible. There’s no point in having $50 deductible and have $49 worth of damages when you pick up your bike at the
dock, and still have paid out for the
insurance.
One thing that hasn’t been mentioned is when you bring the bike back there is a duty tax to pay in this
country. But there is no tax to pay if you are in the service and were stationed in Europe or are being transferred to Europe. The bikes are duty-free.
Also, if you are in the service in Europe, you can buy some British bikes through a Canadian Base Exchange in Germany. Which for some makes can be cheaper, as the Exchange can order from the factory. But it takes about three months for delivery, with the Exchange.
To give you an example, in ’68 I bought a ’68 BSA Spitfire Mk II Special. It was the biggest 650-cc model in ’68. I bought it for $670, and later sold it for $850.
(Continued on page 18)
Continued from page 16
There is also some real good cycle racing in Europe. And you should try to get a schedule of the races from the FIM so you can see some races when you are in the area.
BRUCE VICKROY San Mateo, Calif.
FOUR-STROKE BUFF
I have just finished reading the April ’71 issue of CW, and it’s excellent, of course. I was really glad to see an article on the new BSA Victor MX. Since I started riding five years ago, BSA has needed an update in their production motocross machinery —what there was of it-and I am glad to see that this has finally come about. 1 have been around four-strokes a great deal since I started riding, and from what I know about them, and what I gathered from your article, this bike should be a real popular one with those of us who are partial to the big thumpers. Congratulations on an excellent and informative presentation.
PVT. ROBERT E. WARREN Fort Monmouth, N.J.
BEES AND FLIES
I just finished reading the March issue of CYCLE WORLD. You have a great magazine and some real good road tests in the issue. But I would like to recall a letter written by Scot Adams entitled “Noise Pollution.”
First of all, I’ve owned bikes from 50cc up to 1 200cc, I presently own a 1 25-cc Bultaco with an Amal carburetor and many other extras, including one of them nasty ole downsweep tune pipes.
He claimed that it was alright for the four-cycle engine to be noisy, but not the two-cycle engine. Boy, for you people that can’t take the noise, why don’t you just stay home and watch the Road Runner or Lawrence Welk on TV?
Ever since I can remember the twocycle engine has always sounded like a little bee buzzing. But now times have changed, and so have the designs of bikes and hop up kits. I sure would hate to go to a motocross race and hear a bunch of Huskys, Maicos, CZs, Bultacos, etc., buzzing around the course sounding like a bunch of bees and flies, because of baffles. It’s time for the two-oycle engine to sound off, not the ole ring-ding-ding noise of the sound of a little bee, but the blast of power.
(Continued on page 22)
Continued from page 18
GARY IOVINFLLA Pueblo, Colo.
"FREEDOM MACHINE"
I would like to congratulate you on an article in the March issue of CYCLE WORLD entitled "Freedom Machine.” I his guy really has got it on; that is what motorcycling is all about: freedom.
When I was 16 I first felt this freedom, and since then 1 haven’t been able to stay from it. It's like a fever or a disease that keeps on growing. By the way. 1 am a 6-year veteran and still going strong (on an XLCH Sportster).
It you really want to get a dose of this disease take your bike down to the beach one morning and let the salt air slap you in the face as you ride.
Thank you again for helping us to get it across to the people what motorcycling is all about.
BILL TAYLOR
Augusta, Ga.
Since I have started cycling as a hobby, I have read a number of magazines and have decided on a subscription with yours. Your March '71 issue ("Super Book”) contains information on all aspects of motorcycling.
Mr. Boyte’s "Freedom Machine” pointed out the need for all cyclists to accept their responsibility in the areas of pollution, (air and noise) and of our responsibility to stand up for our rights while keeping in mind the rights of those around us.
FRANK BURNS (no address given)
Congratulations to you as publisher and Mr. K.P. Boyte for a fine piece of fiction. Many attempts have been made to state the mystique of the infernal two-wheeler in the concise form of a single word or short phrase but thus faino one has quite accomplished the task. Mr. Boyte came close . . .
With the great versatility and beauty of the English language, one should be able to state succinctly to all detractors just what the glories of bike riding are. But we can't. Why?
If you wax poetic, you are regarded as a bohemian nut. Describe the machine for its contribution to sensuality (strictly defined), and 4000 misguided legislators and 100.000 equally misguided clergymen become self-appointed moralists to restrict the machine on grounds of keeping the public pure (witness the Porno report). Describe it as simple transport and be openly sneered at by the muscle car drivers and be legislated against as a hazard (to whom?), despite the fact that auto drivers are a menace to cyclists. For what woman or elderly man doesn’t have that particular piece of road built just for his convenience?
(Continued on page 24)
Continued from page 22
Describe the bike as the narcotic it really is (once hooked who ever quits?), and get put on somebody’s list as a pusher or user. Describe it (as Mr. Boyte did) for its contribution to such subjective and sublime feelings of freedom, elan, joy, and solitude those same joys of the spirit that must have been experienced by men when they first beheld a virgin forest, Yosemite Valley, or the very shores of North America—and you will be presumed odd, high, or even dangerously demented.
Finally, when all of the preceding have failed to remove the cycle from the roads and trails, the ecology types will bombard the riders, because they lack the organization to fight back and are easier to attack than the real offenders. I know how the acid-head feels when, in total frustration, he tries to describe his trip to a non-and-neverwill-be user. It is just no good if you don’t try it for yourself. You have a fine magazine the best.
KENNETH H. MILLS Huntingdon, Pa.
UNSAFE MIRRORS
Those street riders whose cycles are equipped with convex curved surface rear view mirrors stand a good chance of getting into dangerous situations. The tact that the only safe method for lane changing is a quick look over your
shoulder in the direction of your turn, does not preclude the use of the rear view mirror to make an initial judgment of the position and speed of vehicles in your intended lane.
Mirrors of this type are designed to provide a wider viewing area, but, at the same time, objects will appear to be at a greater distance than they actually are. An error in distance judgment of up to 30 tt. is possible! As an example, a vehicle appearing in the mirror in the lane to your left and well behind may be only slightly behind and closing quickly. Had you turned into this lane using the mirror alone, a collision would be unavoidable. I would suggest these mirrors be replaced with conventional flat surface mirrors which will prove to be safer and more accurate.
LEE R. KELLY
Anaheim, Calif.
TEXAS HELMET LAW
Yes, we too have a helmet law in Texas! 1 am an older rider of motorcycles and regrettably haven’t voiced any opinion of the proliferation of discriminatory laws. Here is my say. We have some caliche pits here, and Sunday evenings are spent by kids, including myself, flying up those trails. I love to get those chalk marks on my knees and elbows too! Our local law enforcement boys come out and watch at times. We stack our helmets in a big pile and away we go. This sport is on city park property, and no one gives a hoot whether we bust our heads or not. The traffic is 100 times worse on those trails than it ever gets on the street. No one gets hurt except a skinned place now and then, when polishing the ground. My point is this: why are our necks so valuable on the street that we have to have our own private law, yet when we get to this little motorcycle paradise, the law doesn't apply?
GERALD CHAMBERS Lubbock, Texas
