Darkside Review ???

Hi Guys,

For those of you in Australia (especially Sydney), Peter Thoemig, the editor of Road Rider and Cruiser+Trike, is very interested in putting together an evaluation of the darkside for inclusion in the mag. He would be looking at insurance, legalities etc as part of the evaluation.

Peter is a very balanced and highly respected individual as many of you would know (I threw that in just in case he reads this and sends a free subscription my way ), and would present an impartial viewpoint. I have pasted his request below.

Cruiser+Trike is interested in investigating this whole phenomenon.
Are there any Darksiders out there who would be willing to let us ride their bikes to begin to form some err... informed opinions?
The bike would have to be available in or near Sydney, and the ride would be carefully supervised.
Drop me a line at thebear@universalmagazines.com.au and we'll set something up.

I'd sure like to see some credible publications do the same here in the States.

Please keep us up to date on the findings down there, Pete!

He's having trouble getting a darksider to put their hand up and lend a bike in Sydney for the evaluation, Phil.

Pete

PeteOZ said:

He's having trouble getting a darksider to put their hand up and lend a bike in Sydney for the evaluation, Phil.

Pete

Click to expand...

Post a list of questions and concerns here and see what you get. At least you would have a comparative from the riders perspective.

With all the preconceived notions and other negative vibes on the subject, I'm not surprised. Plus, any publication stands to lose their advertising dollars from the tire companies if they published anything positive regarding darkside. Lastly, in our big brother government environment world-wide, it's not a good idea to bring too much attention to the topic. Before you know it, some tire manufacturing lobbyist is paying big bucks to some politician to introduce "safety" legislation.

As much as I would like to see a real, honest, objective evaluation, it's best that it's not done.

Oh, for crying out loud!!! Now, we have a Darkside conspiracy theorist...

No offense, tdragger, but that's about the biggest pile of drivel I've seen posted here.

Y'all know my position. It is an informed and experienced one. People can and should choose to ride on whatever tire they prefer. However, even though there are tradeoffs both plus and minus to running either a MT or a CT on the R3, the relative risks and rewards to the rider should be made clear to those contemplating going dark. For me, the increased risks of slower response to the rider's input and riding on an unreinforced sidewall, when added to the overall diminishment in responsiveness, road feel, tracking and handling, underscored the CT as a poor choice for how and where I ride this motorcycle.

So I say, let the so-called experts chime in. Although their views might be considered as subjective ones by most advocates of the Darkside, their input would be welcomed in term of having a healthy conversation on this subject. Interestingly, any and all opinions I have seen or read on this subject that are offered up by highly experienced professionals from within the industry, have been universally negative with regard to the use of car tires on motorcycles. Although I don't always totally agree with such views, when it comes to the R3, I am firmly in their court.

darkside...

yeah,


especially when we run 'em under inflated, eh Phil ?




greg

Haahaa !

Well Phil, that drivel is based on the following:

A good friend who is the editor-in-chief of a large, very well known motorcycle magazine in the U.S. specifically told me that he would not touch the subject due to pressures from advertisers. It's not drivel, it's real life because millions of dollars are at stake.

Next, when I had my state inspection performed 2 years ago, the inspector wouldn't proceed with the inspection until he checked the guidelines book AND called the State Police to check to see if a c/t was legal. The only provision is that the tire rotation is correct. So yes, it's not a good idea to flaunt this in front of pols.

Add in the posts from our friends across the pond who have trouble with their inspections and you have a good basis for being worried about uninformed government officials making stupid laws. Not like that's never happened before.

Pressure from advertisers is always present. This particular publication has a good record of objective journalism and I could show you plenty of examples of where it has run a story or editorial comment that would NOT have pleased advertisers. In any case, they'd hardly be advocating the demise of all MTs and I don't see too many CTs advertised in the mag.

As for the political threat; it's difficult to see how anyone could legislate against it anyway. Is a tire actually described as being for a particular use in such a way that a law could specify it's for certain vehicles only? And how would you define the vehicle - by the number of wheels? What about trikes or bikes with side cars or indeed trailers. Or three wheeled cars? Won't happen. I would have thought a greater risk would be from insurance companies who will inevitably base their decisions on claims history, not opinion.

CT is not for everyone and I'm in the "yet to be convinced" camp. I hope they get solid input for the article and some good info not just on the handling/wear characteristics but also around insurance and vehicle inspection issues, to help people make informed choices.