Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Old's Cool' started by lrutt, Oct 21, 2010.
BSA Gold Star:
Royal Enfield Bullet 500 (modern version):
Beautiful except for the 1' gap between the fender and wheel.
I'm amazed that Brit bikes feature so much with you guys.
Pre unit Triumphs do it for me. Snarly exhaust note, quick and light.
Georgeous bike there. Saw a guy swin by MAX BMW today on an Orange/Cream 1959. Don't know if they were original to the design, but it looked good with mid level pipes riding just above the primary.
I feel a bike can just look right . . . intrinsically . . . it just does. You know it when you see it.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
But I also think your experience . . . on the road . . . or some other subliminal previous experience connects you to the vision of the bike . . . has a lot to do with it (even if you havent actually seen that particular bike/model previously before.) Whether it was Steve McQueen getting air time over a barbed wire fence or my round about on a Daytona 500 after a year in hell as a medic in the mountains of <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comffice:smarttags" /><st1:country-region w:st="on">Vietnam</st1:country-region> and <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1lace w:st="on">Laos</st1lace></st1:country-region> . . . 1950-75 triumphs just look right. I still have her . . . maintenance nightmare that she is. Choke her, kick her hard, smell her, ride her, listen to the ring, feel the vibration . . . and its just right ( I think Im still talking about my triumph )
Having said that . . . A Norton like my Dad was my first choice . . . SF dealer couldnt get one . . . and I just had to get out on the road after waste waiting the summer. Either ride is equally just right. But then my R1100 GS is sooo ugly and heavy . . . it just right too.
I fear this thread will run into a brick wall when word gets out a 441 Victor is 'gorgeous'. Sadly flawed with looks to match.
I don't know how or why, but Brits have made some very elegant machines. Witness the lovely lines of the Hawker Hurricane, the De Havilland Mosquito, and the Supermarine Spitfire of WWII, and of course, past and current world class automobile designs.
Ducati 450 Desmo. Simple and elegant.
Shamelessly stolen from Jehu.....
Todays "flavor of the year" styling is just a few years from being dated looking. Look back at a picture of a 15 year old sport bike that was "ultimate" in appearance at the time, yet compaired to todays sportbike old and un-refined looking...maybe even cumbersome or bulky. I think the difference with older bikes, of which many pictures have been posted as examples of what looks "right", is that for the most part changes were made so that form fit the function. Generally the bikes appearance became what they needed it to be to hold all the necessary components in place. There certainly were some gaudy styling details on some bikes (ie: emblems on side covers), but the overall simplicity of older bikes was the beauty.
I'm done now......
danedg, that thumper looks great! any info on that?
Good looking bikes, all of them. Why? Simple answer in my simple mind. They all have round headlights!!!. That's right! Nice, Big, Round, Headlights! That's the key. Rectangular? No. Round. Got it? Round. Rich
That's right, keep the function on top of style and you're already ahead. There are so many living abortions of styled bikes I won't sully the waters here, except to make one (non-photographic non-burn your eyes) example. Early to mid 80's (or anything 80's really) Yamaha Maxim. What is it? Standard? Cruiser? Chopper? It does succeed at being horribly ugly. The final bit of magic are those cast twirl wheels. Not to be a stick in the mud but for each photo of the several beautiful bikes posted on this particular thread they should each be juxtaposed for direct comparison with a '66-'70 Bonneville. Indeed, some come real close, (Ducati 450) but some are understandably different for their design purpose and yet come pretty close anyway. For the next level of massive generalization I say a "looks so right" bike can't be more than a twin, everything just gets out of balance and starts to, or simply looks fat. That's not to diss on any triple or four not being a classic, but they probably will not a "looks so right" bike.
I bought this old 1970 Honda CD-175 at an auction a few years back. (since gone to a new owner) The "CD" model was common in Europe / England but never saw many in the States.
The fenders should have been painted, a previous owner must have had them chromed.
Always liked the look of it:
While in general I would agree that twins and singles have that right look, to me one of the few exceptions is the big Indian inline 4 with the full flowing fenders. I think those fenders are some of the best in all of motorcycling. They make the bike look so flowing just sitting still. And I just like the concept of the inline 4 sitting longitudenal, matches the rest of the bike. It looks purpose built as well, but for a much different purpose than a Bonnie or Commando or Manx.
It's a mystery to me.
Picture of my Dad riding my CL350 in the early eighties. I picked up the bike in boxes, and put it together...(yes, he always refused to wear a helmet)