Up Front

UP FRONT

Here’s what’s wrong

David Edwards

I’D LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE ALmost 500 Cycle World readers who took the time to respond to my call for letters in May’s Up Front. In that column, titled “What's wrong?” I asked you to identify what you saw as motorcycling’s problems and then offer solutions. Because most letters contained more than one problem/ solution, there were about 1300 suggestions in all.

The responses that were mailed in—almost all well-informed, articulate and interesting—justified my faith in this magazine’s readership as the most-knowledgeable, most-enthusiastic motorcycle riders in the world, and could easily fill this issue and a few more if printed in their entirety. Instead, here are how the responses tallied and a few representative examples.

Thirteen percent of the 1300 responses indicated that many current motorcycles are too technically sophisticated, too specialized, too fast and were covered with too much plastic. Martin Wandersee from Tucson, Arizona, categorized such bikes as “Tupperware techno-monsters,” and Marvin McConoughey of Corvallis, Oregon, worried that motorcycles are fast becoming “rare and expensive road jewelry for an esoteric elite.”

With 12 percent of the responses, second on the complaint list and, as many pointed out, closely related to the response number one, was the high purchase price of new motorcycles. Larry Raisch of Lynwood, Washington, voiced the thoughts of many when he said, “The complexity and level of performance achieved by (some of) today’s bikes can only be appreciated by a relative few. The cost affects all potential buyers.”

Better rider education, said 9 percent of the responses, would lead to more-capable riders and less accidents. “Clearly what we need is mandatory rider safety courses for all new motorcyclists,” said Steve White from Antioch, California. “Not the rinky-dink tests used by the DMV, but thorough, comprehensive instruction designed to challenge the individual.”

Many responses, 9 percent, spoke to the sport’s tarnished public image. A better image could be presented, many thought, by a concerted media program. Hardy Kornfield of Cambridge, Massachusetts, noted that a lot of non-riders are “marching toward a comfortably dull middle age,” and it’s the manufacturers’ job, he said, to give these people “the right nudge to get (them) thinking about bikes ... to be shown that the (twowheeled) equivalent of a Testarossa can be had for under $ 10,000, that it can be parked anywhere, that it instantly makes you kcool' and that it can turn the daily commute into the moral equivalent of skiing in the Alps.”

Like 7 percent of the responses, one of Springfield, Virginia’s Lawrence Hedges’ concerns was a lack of standard-style motorcycles. “Can’t someone build a mid-sized (500900cc) machine which emphasizes reliability over technology/performance ... at a price which a weekend rider can afford and justify?” he wondered.

The need for stricter licensing procedures was noted by another 7 percent of the responses. “There has to be more to getting a bike license than weaving around some pylons at 5 mph,” implored Dave Jorgensen of St. Paul, Alberta, Canada.

A lack of affordable insurance was also cited in 7 percent of the responses. One solution, thought Chris Altenburg of San Jose, California, might be a “motorcycle-industrycontrolled insurance company that considers age, driving record and accident-free miles ridden in setting premiums.”

The need for helmet laws and other safety laws was called for by 6 percent of the responses. Ian Coleman of Hollywood, California, was especially fervent: “To allow motorcycles to be used without (the riders wearing) helmets, leathers and gloves is akin to aiding in a suicide,” he preached.

Motorcycle magazine test reports took some lumps from 5 percent of the responses, summed up by Stephen Dupre of Westhain, Massachusetts, who told manufacturers to “stop listening to journalists and start listening to the average rider who has to actually buy the bike with real money and ride it for many years.”

Other responses included the belief that the makers change models too often (4 percent) and that a lot of today’s machines would be more appealing if they were easier to work on (4 percent). The high cost of parts and service is a determent to the sport, said 4 percent of the responses, as are poor customer-service relationships on the parts of dealerships and manufacturers (3 percent).

Surprisingly, only 3 percent of the responses specifically called for new entry-level and commuter bikes. The threat of government interference concerned 3 percent, with many of those (2 percent of the total responses) calling for increased membership in the American Motorcyclist Association and other groups as a cure for that problem.

Mathematicians in the audience will note that the preceding percentages don’t total to 100. That’s because a number of responses defied categorization, including the one from Minneapolis, Minnesota’s Zachary Zniewski who, among other observations, bemoaned motorcycling’s lack of “leathered-up punker girls with tattoos.”

All of the “What’s wrong?” replies, Zachary’s included, will be photo-copied and sent with explanation to the top men at the world’s motorcycle manufacturers, who are in for some very interesting reading.

Thanks again to all those who participated and spoke up. I’m betting that people will listen. They’d be dumb not to.