Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Hacks' started by bobobob, Oct 4, 2011.
The new Aerostich catalog has a Ural on the cover. Is Ural in danger of becoming "cool"?
watch those prices to climb even higher... :huh....
"Simply put, the Uralsgearbox lacks precision even when compared to the rest of
the machine, and its out of step with the modern world. More
refinement would undoubtedly broaden the Urals appeal without
hurting its character.
The Urals transmission ratios are also on the tall side, makingit difficult to haul the 866.5-lb. rig up to speed with any urgency.
Our test unit trudged from 060 mph in 15.97 sec. At the same
time, its 1.19 fourth gear ratio and 4.62:1 final drive cause the
engine to rev along at 4850 rpm at 65 mph, making sustained
interstate motoring an impractical strain on the engine."
My test ride didn't include any off road, but I still know enough about off-roading to comment about the transmission being geared absurdly high for anything being marketed as off road capable. All off road capable 4x4 vehicles have 2 speed transfer cases with the ability to reduce final drive by a wide margine.
Ural's too high gear ratios make serious off road use impossible without 100% chance of damage, and please don't post those off road videos (which really support my POV)
Genuine WWII bikes were geared to go half that fast. Adding HP and taller gearing didn't really make it highway friendly OR help it off road....but another gear or two would certianly do BOTH!
Got cash in my pocket, still waiting for them to get it right.
After 4 years and over 60,000 km on a Ural as my only vehicle, I have formed some opinions also.
As usual, branding a Ural for what it isn't, not for what it is, an all purpose multi terrain utility vehicle.
No doubt it is geared too high for really technical off roading but it is still much better than most other rigs off road. "100% chance of damage"? that's just nonsense.
"interstate motoring an impractical strain"? Again a ridiculous over statement. If you want to do lots of miles quickly a Ural isn't the right tool for the job, but it is perfectly capable of extended freeway travel.
I expect Ural will continue to evolve in some details and overall quality, but I doubt it will ever deviate dramatically from what it is. They seem perfectly content to build Urals for folks who want Urals and leave the rest to custom builders.
You are missing out on a S--TLOAD of fun. Both on and off-road. Life is short so live for today. My Ural gets the most riding. The KTM is second. The BMW is basically in storage at this point.
In Dec 1985 I rode my XT600 Tenere from Sydney to Perth by the most direct route, 4,000kms. The trip nearly crippled me. I was able to cover big kays with the 30L tank, but sitting in one position all day was torture.:eek1
In Sep last year I picked up my new Ural T and rode it from Armidale in NSW to Bunbury in Western Australia via Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and Port Lincoln. Over 6,000kms. I've never felt so rested at the end of a days riding.
Sure the kms racked up each day weren't as high as on the Tenere. I saw more of my surroundings and the constant sideways forces when cornering meant my butt never became numb or sore.
I like my Ural so much I'm selling my 2007 DR650 with it's 30L Safari tank and will continue to enjoy my touring at a more sedate pace.
To the gods in Irbit......Don't change a thing! When you're on a good thing......stick to it!
Whew! Glad to see you guys ain't dead...
I was surprised to see the lack of response to the (well written) article, so I decided to stir the pot a bit.
I've been toying with ideas of installing planetary gears in the drive line, making a true rock crawler. The problem I'm having is figuring out how to do it without lengthening the frame or swingarm so I can carry the parts and switch back and forth at the trailhead.
I'll let ya know if I come up with anything
I have a fraction of the hours you and others have on their rigs but I can tell you it is the most fun on a motorcycle I have had in years, maybe ever. Ural has it right, at least right enough for me. Again, at this point I feel I am a Ural Poser because I am still in the honeymoon phase and only two months in, but I think for what it was designed to do, it does very well. I am afraid as Ural's become more popular and main stream they might be tempted to add and "improve" things that take away from the original mission and reason why many bought them. I had to be reminded of that and am glad folks on here and other forums clearly outlined what I was getting into. Because of that I am very happy with the purchase and performance.
The BMW GS series (I owned a 2009 GSA) comes to mind as something that has "evolved" so far away from what it originally was that it is no longer what it was intended to be.
Most folks who get on any sidecar rig for the first time find them very awkward and clumsy. Add to that, a Ural is basically a new old school mootorcycle, you cant expect rave reviews.
Ural actually made a rig with a dual range transmission after the war, and there is still one in the museum in Irbit. A dual range transmission would be entirely possible without changing anything but the transmission. The trouble is the cost of R&D and having to produce all the new tooling necessary would be cost prohibitive at this point. A 2 speed FD similar to the Ruckstall made for the model T might be more feasible cost wise.
I would love to have a dual range transmission, but I'm not holding my breath.
why does 8.6:1 need premium fuel?
As an owner of a Ural for 6 years, I would say there are many flaws in the design and it would be nice to see improvements in the gearing, possible hi/lo range, etc especially for off road use.
But as it currently stands, it is an extremely inexpensive machine that is very tough and does many things, not always as well as possible, but it can do them in capable hands.
People regularly take them on sustained, multi-thousand kilometre journeys, usually with a few road side repairs but the point is, they get there and back.
Kind of like an AK 47, simple, perhaps crude but highly effective.
Keep waiting if you wish but you are missing out on a great machine.
"Premium" is a relative term.......check out the difference between european "RON" and the US "AKI" octane ratings . The Ural runs fine on US Regular 87 octane
Thanks for the link, my co-worked dropped a photocopy from the magazine on my desk last week.
".. I love it for what it is. Like the Royal Enfield Bullet, the Ural
is the real thing, not some vintage bike pretender thats actually a slide rule-engineered rocket on rails dressed in old-school
A bit off on their calculations: 65 mph = 4540 rpm
I think most Ural riders use 60 mph as the practical max speed for sustained cruising which = 4190 rpm.
If you really want the most fun for the buck, I might consider a Suzuki 650 Intruder with a Cosy or homebuilt "old school" looking hack.
For the cost of a new Ural, I feel that it should have more power, better brakes and better gearing.
It would be a great bike at $8,000 all up, but $12k + is a little stiff.
Enjoy your proposed Nipponese toy.
It`ll never be what a Ural is or do what a Ural can do the way a Ural does it...but going by what you say that you feel,it may tick your box.
Here's my 2 cents:
I got my Ural for many reasons.
Main thing was I wanted an outfit. I went so far as to buy a used/beat Velorex and started refurbishing it (mount it to some twin bike of undetermined origin)
Then I started looking into it and researching (many here with good advice) I went with the Ural and am damn happy I did.
25 yrs of biking with lots of styles of rides and I cant think of any other bike I had that gave me more smiles (Ok my first but it's hard not to best the first bike).
It's slower and clunkier but thats swell. Ill have a bike for the fast rides. It's dependable and easy to work on. I do everything on it (comute, work, carry tools, kids, parents etc) and a big one-
A company still makes it.. It's not a custom or build up. There is a fantastic company that still thinks of sidecar riders. And by the sounds of things, it's growing. Ill support that.
SLow on highways- phah, it does the limit and I hate slab... If yer in a rush to get there, leave earlier...
WWII technology. Ill take that. First thing I'd buy if I had the dosh is a 1942 Zundapp KS750...
Was there a 650 model? Maybe you meant 750? Anyway the cost and quality of the sidecar has to be taken into consideration along with the bike. The Cozy (Cosy) sidecar has nowhere near the features or durability of a Ural sidecar. And a home built one may not cost as much in $$ but it will certainly make up for it in the time it takes to make. The point is that your sidecar is not just an after thought. They will be joined for life, married, need to cooexist, be made for one another
So here's someone trying to argue the same subject with a C50 and a C Stanley sidecar. Mind you the bike it's not NEW I'm also sure there's a book on the topic of out doing what Ural does. (hmm wonder why?) And don't get me wrong, I agree this is a nice setup that would be comparable to a Retro and it costs less $$.
And it sure looks pretty sitting there on the grass.
But where's the history? Where's the romance? Where's the joy in having a "cheap" run-or-the-mill bike? And where are the pictures of it doing this?
Or just sitting there