Letters
LETTERS
ENTER THE CRIES OF ANGUISH . . . Your opening statement to "A Look At Motorcycle Engines" (April CW) prompted me to write. I agree that motorcycle engines are too noisy, expensive and have a relatively short life, and wonder why someone hasn't seen fit to experiment with steam powered cycles. The idea isn't original with me; back in the 1870's a fellow made himself a steam bicycle which, according to one source, was a marvel of compactness and had a top speed of 60 mph. More recently, another steam enthusiast fitted an antique steam car engine into a Harley-Davidson. Top speed in this case was around 90 mph. Neither bike was fast by Triumph, Norton or BSA standards, but one was homemade about 90 years ago, and the other was an adaptation of a 50-year-old engine. There may be many more examples but these two at least prove it is possible. With modern engineering, bearings, manufacturing techniques and lightweight metals, it becomes not only possible but practical as well.
I have a design that is perhaps over simplified and I am sure there are many problems to overcome, but I can't see where it would be any more difficult than coming up with a 250cc liquid-cooled V-8 from a clean sheet of paper as has been suggested by some. Once a small boiler was designed, further changes in the engine, etc., would be minor, compared to today's complicated bike engines. I have enjoyed John Bond's articles in Road & Track for 8 or 9 years and was glad to see one in CYCLE WORLD. He and Gordon Jennings both have a way of making the quite technical things seem a little less confusing. I'd be interested in any comment you would care to make on the future of steam. Until some enterprising soul comes up with a steam bike, I guess I'll just have to struggle along with my Honda. BRUCE D. DAVIDS North Hollywood, Calif.
Congratulations! John Bond's article reached heights of asininity unmatched even by the "Letters" column. Bond's campaign to do away with poorly designed modern engines will presumably result in a motorcycle engine which is better than present engines in the following respects:
1. Cost, by using cast iron instead of highly-machined aluminum.
2. Cooling, by using fluid cooling of the cylinder head and/or a cooling fan.
3. Engine life and serviceability, by using plain bearings and larger journals.
4. Balance, by connecting two singles with large expensive gears and using shaft drive.
5. Smoother running, by eliminating the hemi-head and poppet valves in favor of sleeve valves.
The loss of power occasioned by step 5 can be made up by increasing the size of the engine ... an easy step with cast iron engines. However, this means that each of the five improvements will result in increased engine weight. Therefore I propose that two or more wheels be added, one front and one in back. This design, which has been proven through long usage in other vehicles, will not only easily support the added weight but will eliminate all accidents caused by foolish cyclists who sometimes lean the bike over too far. If all of these suggestions are faithfully followed, maybe in a few years the Hondas will be able to make it around the JEAN O. WILLTROUT Austin, Texas
So John Bond's "Miscellaneous Grumblings" have turned to motorcycles have they? Now, I know that I seem to spend an inordinate amount of time repairing instead of riding, but I've tended to believe the friendly local dealers who say this is because I overstress the machinery. But Bond says few motorcycle motors can take one hour at rated power. He's wrong . . . isn't he?
A good automobile or airplane engine is thought of in hundreds and thousands of ' hours at rated load. And this is not time to failure, but merely time to overhaul. Just a while ago Comet was crowing about their endurance run of about 1000 hours at full speed, and the pognoscents (like Bond) were snickering that this didn't prove a thing since almost any manufacturer willing to take the trouble could have done the same thing with his cars.
Maybe we have to accept shorter engine life due to high specific output. But then there are those embarrassing model airplane engines. A well made low output of, say, two horsepower per cubic inch (the high output engines develop as much as 4 hp per cubic inch), will last for several hundred hours. They fail by wearing out, not by failure.
Probably the closest motors in displacement, power, bhp per cubic inch, and power per pound to motorcycle engines are outboard motors. Unlike the engine on a bike, which is not held wide open for long stretches at a time, these powerplants are run hour after hour at full throttle. Worse, frisky work with the rudder can pop the prop out of the water, leading to awe-inspiring over-revving. Both fourstroke and two-stroke (the two-strokes operate with as little as one part oil to 100 parts gasoline remember), not only survive much more than one hour at full load, but any outboard that lasted anywhere near that short a time would be laughed right out of the market. A grim comparison, and a terrible indictment of contemporary motorcycle engine design.
I hope that CYCLE WORLD will examine this matter further in future issues. There is just no comparing the automobile engine, the outboard motor, or even the model airplane engine of today, with its ancestor of thirty years ago. But in motorcycles not only has there been precious little progress in that time but, incredible as it sounds, in contrast, there are many cases where 1934 engines are still being built and sold! Isn't it about time that those of us who'd rather ride than repair demanded something better from head-inthe-sand manufacturers? J. G. KROL Bellflower, Calif. Mr. Bond's edifying article in the April issue of CYCLE WORLD is by and large an imbroglio of unrealistic pedanticism, wampum economics, and shady parallels.
(Continued on page 28)
LETTERS
Immediately following the opening of his discourse is an absurd comparison between the relative costs of automobile and motorcycle engine manufacture. First we are asked to examine the half-ton cast iron horses fitted into pleasure cars following years of experimentation where pursuit is directed by profiteers toward the "cheapest workable." Advertising media, in an attempt to maintain some identification with honest promotion, no longer peddle the automobiles with "seventy-cents-a pound" power with accents uoon quality workmanship under the hood. Rather, they point out how desirable it is to own quenched dragons with hundreds of cubic inches of displacement, complete with pseudo-European accoutrements which are good for nothing save transportation and an occasional mob-appealing burst of acceleration. Nine thousand rpm is not frequently heard of in the production car world, and masochistic drivers can attain destructive rpm levels in the average car's engine (the one that costs so much less) far short of this figure. True, some automobiles have aluminum engines, and a select few have overhead cams and other appealing features, but these do not come any cheaper than their counterparts in motorcycledom. Motorcyclists, on the whole, are more willing to pay the craftsman for his labors — workmanship which they take pride in possessing.
Mr. Bond tells us that motorcycle engines have undergone no major changes in the past fifty years, and then proceeds to describe a type of construction which is astonishingly simple in concept and fabrication. I am sure that more time has elapsed since the last important innovation in the automotive powerplant; many first rate ideas survive and lend themselves to different applications. Honda enioys first place in sales, gives every indication of retaining their position and serves us well as an example contradicting the charge that motorcycle engines are unsophisticated units made entirely on "simple machines." Honda engines are technologically advanced with a clever coordination of mass production and "hand made" techniques utilized in their construction. And they don't look like anything 'else' that is fifty years old. Next, the motorcycle engine, in its present forms, is denounced as "fragile" and we are told that these mechanical misfits have endured solely because riders are unable to maintain full throttle operation for one hour. Incredible! I own a later model Triumph Bonneville which is standard in every respect except one: neither I nor it heretofore knew it was fragile. True, there is no place where I can legally operate it with the throttle wide open for one hour, but I beat the hell out of it, on and off the road, most of the time. This has been going on for some time now, and the only complaint I register is that the porcelain pickups on the magneto crack when I ford streams over a foot deep. Its foibles are few, like most other bikes! From where I sit, it appears that automobiles are driven while motorcycles are "pushed" as daily fare, though both have about equal reputations for reliability under these widely varying conditions. Motorcycles, in clement weather, can be raced (often on terrain which is perdition to cars and their engines) or conservatively ridden at random, whereas the engines in racing cars are not adaptable to metropolitan traffic conditions and the staid stockers expose their flaws quite rapidly on race courses. I will not accept Mr. Bond's condescension, anyway, until he names one site where an automobile can be run all out for an hour on which a motorcycle can not.
We are enlightened when we hear that "air-cooling is totally unacceptable for motorcycles," a "conclusion" that follows from the fact that no motorcycle other than a BMW has a "reasonable chance to achieve some cooling." Mr. Bond's logic fails me. I think he is overlooking a few basics. Removing heat from a motorcycle engine is not quite analogous to this process in automobile engines, and I support this by exposing elemental differences in operation which have bearing upon the method of heat transfer. Automobile destatic traffic awaiting action. He can perform reasonably well under conditions the motorcyclist can eliminate for his mount. For example, the cyclist is not forced to sit, overheating, in masses of static traffic awaiting action. He can cautiously advance toward the impasse, leaving the herd when the signal changes or the trailing caboose is past, or he can shut off his engine. Nothing is lost with the latter expedient; he can do this without suffering nervous twitches because a slight effort on the kick starter will get him going straightaway; he doesn't have to worry about a dead battery and towing charges. This is the reason behind the fans on the VWs and Corvairs. Porsche built a car which was not designed to remain idle and arranged it so that the fan would disengage at a predetermined rpm, i.e., speed, when the flow of air was sufficient to cool it without assistance. Also, the shrouding and fans cannot be abandoned until the buying public accepts the repulsive sight of an automobile with its unsavory looking guts exposed to the airstream. Motor scooters with inboard engines nearly all have flywheel-driven cooling fans, but when exposed and propelled at respectable speeds, air-cooled engines seem to thrive admirably. My knowledge of the longgone-and-not-missed Franklin is limited to heresy rsic] and literature treating this novelty is lacking. I am told that this preEdsel lemon had a rotary five-cylinder engine which rotated abouta stationary crankshaft and was beset by cooling problems. I have my doubts about their engineers' "proof," if this was the embodiment of it, as no one has made any earnest attempt to revive this failure. Water-cooled motorcycles, at around the same time, were experimented with, the most popular being the ill-fated BiAutogo (this contrivance had four wheels, but two were ancillary and did not make contact with the pavement once the vehicle was in motion). Even if it had been a success, I saw one and wouldn't want one.
(Continued on page 30)
LETTERS
"If pressed, an air-cooled engine designer will admit that one third of his engine is cooled by oil." Is there a conspiracy among these people to suppress the truth about established engineering data? Do they tell all under duress? Some watercooled engines in automobiles, which are definitely not one-third cooled by oil, have oil coolers, so this does not "explain why both Corvair and VW engines have an oil cooler." Then too, how many people would want a motorcycle with a radiator, hoses, fans, belts to drive same and antifreeze (which has a habit of severely damaging engines when it enters crankcases) and attendant leaks; these are some of the nuisances motorcycles have managed to escape from.
The study of the evolution of the plain bearings was interesting, and I was certainly impressed by the liberal quantity of numerical data included. I continue to prefer the anti-friction variety for some of the duties Mr. Bond objects to, though, and concede no more than expense to plain ones' advantageous qualities in these applications. Roller bearings are more expensive. It's also true that roller bearings "turn blue and seize when overloaded or over-speeded." Plain bearings are not so delicate; when they are overloaded or overspeeded, they simply disintegrate. The journal and the rod then are usually unserviceable without the aid of a master mechanic and a host of specialized equipment. I can say from experience that it happens right quick too. Let us investigate overloading and overspeeding after explaining why "it is a popular misconception that ball and roller bearings have come to be called 'anti-friction' types." There is a logical reason for it.
Roller bearings and ball bearings are termed anti-friction because the contact, theoretically, made by the moving members is minimal, and of a desirable nature. The balls and rollers have a rolling contact rather than a sliding contact which produces less friction than two surfaces sliding against each other as in plain bearings. Try sliding your foot across the floor, and then try to stand on a group of marbles or parallel cylinders; the contrast is immediately and painfully clear. Theory is theory and not reality. These balls and rollers, along with their inner and outer races, are not made of inelastic material, so in operation the metal tangent to the ball or roller is depressed and the material immediately preceding it is raised through this displacement causing resistance to the rolling action. This process varies with the load, but only rules out efficiency over the plain bearing when it is used where loads exceeding those which the bearing was designed for are manifest; this is not a defect; the plain types also fail when overloaded and are more critical in this respect. There is friction in anti-friction bearings because the rollers and balls would not roll, but slide, if there were none. However, in the case of the plain bearing this friction is greater because the resistance is a cylindrical surface, while balls make contact on a series of points and rollers on a series of lines. The area of the cylinder is greater, much greater, than the area [sic] of the points and lines of the balls and rollers. Friction, inversely proportional to the area of contact, is thus lessened while the force and coefficient of friction of the materials is the same. In practice the substances used are not identical — and neither are the coefficients — but this is empirically determined, varying with the conditions the bearing is used under. Summarily, antifriction bearings are so-called because by comparison with plain bearings the friction is nominal and almost nonexistent. The term is hardly a misnomer.
(Continued on page 32)
LETTERS
Overloading an anti-friction bearing in an application it was designed for, assuming it is properly maintained as all bearings should be, is not more common than in the plain type. I cite the loadings they perform under on railroad equipment in all climes. They last and last and last — with tons and tons of force on them. Overspeeding? Glance at the innards of a modern electric motor that turns up twenty or thirty thousand rpm or a hundred thousand rpm turbine. You won't find any plain bearings keeping them together; they're all anti-friction. Back to the motorcycle province. Maybe plain bearings are quieter, but of all the complaints I've heard about motorcycles — and some of them are weird indeed — I have yet to chance upon the individual who complained about noise emanating from a roller or ball bearing. And when they do fail, the noise they DO make is far more pleasing than the sledging kathunk-kathunk their plain counterparts make. Who's kidding who about servicing? Ask the man who has replaced both. Plain bearings are correctly fitted only when they are lapped in and all surfaces have been rendered surgically clean to prevent their distortion. Any forcing or abuse will ruin it. With the majority of ball and roller bearings in a motorcycle engine (I naturally exclude the Honda connecting rod bearings, for example, because of their method of assembly, though I would rather replace these than pour and scrape a bearing as is the case with some plain bearings), the replacement boils down to a simple off with the old and on with the new. One needn't wait for an anti-friction bearing to "seat itself" or "wear in" either. Perhaps they do not belong on crankshafts. Perhaps. I have experienced main bearing failure on main bearings which, had they been plain ones, would have forced me to regrind the crankshaft (if it was within limits) or replace half the crankcase or both — this is a high price to pay for the dubious advantages of a plain bearing.
Balancing is too complex a problem for me to deal with in depth. Motorcyclists are generally not willing to pay for rubbermounted engines with shaft drive which Mr. Bond points out as an escape from vibration. This is evident — there are many riders on non-BMWs; there are some who don't even like this brand because of the unusual arrangement of components necessitated by this innovation. And anyone with two eyes realizes that "the 'ideal' for all motorcycles would be an engine in perfect balance." His notions for achieving this commendable goal are impractical. He states that "only two arrangements give perfect balance" and then lists three — the balance shaft running in a direction opposite that of the crankshaft on an offset opposed twin, the three-throw crankshaft, and the square-four type of dual and connected crankshafts, which he purports to be "the only logical way to build a twin for motorcycle use."
One automotive magazine — and it may have been Mr. Bond's Road and Track — had an article a few years ago covering what was then a recently developed squarefour engine using mass-produced parts (rods, pistons, etc.) and explained that two serious drawbacks were evident. One was the cooling which was not uniform and the other was the energy and space consumed by the interconnecting gears — gears that had to be sufficiently sturdy to withstand all the engine's torque, but of no value save balancing. Very costly. Assuming that we are not satisfied with the couple inherent in engines having two offset opposed cylinders, his suggestion for solving this problem with an additional connecting rod (as in his illustration) has merit. But why add an extra connecting rod? Rotary aircraft engines offer another solution: they pin one rod to the other, which could be applied to our theoretically perfect opposed twin to eliminate the couple — and Mr. Bond's extra connecting rod. If he were earnestly concerned about this subject, he would do something in his own backyard first. Road and Track contains many articles praising four cylinder inline automobiles even though not one of them has had the flywheel turning at twice crankshaft speed which is necessary and sufficient to balance their engines.
Or what of the fours, sixes and eights that have offset cylinders and their related couples? Where is his delight in listing the undesirable features in motorcycle engines when his forte is writing about machines with the same failures multiplied two, three and morefold? Surely a "Buick V-6 would give a motorcycle frame the St. Vitus dance." I wouldn't doubt it a bit. The ill conceived remark about "in the car (Buick Special) no vibration can be felt at any speed" taxes my credulity when I know that Buick and Oldsmobile were forced to supersede the motor mounts in their products which were equipped with the V-8 from which the V-6 derives. The V-6 is not a smooth engine, but I suppose the motor mounts no longer shear because the problem was coped with in the predecessor. A better-balanced engine like a Chevrolet V-8 will give satisfactory performance — not at all like St. Vitus dance — in a motorcycle as Mr. Thompson and others have proved.
(Continued on page 34)
LETTERS
I prefer to omit the discussion of combustion chambers and valves. My copy of CYCLÉ WORLD was minus the illustration Mr. Bond alluded to in this section, and I am unable to grasp anything of value here without it. But wait — it concludes by stating that the Corvette is a fine example of a car with a high output engine that runs smoothly and intimates motorcycle powerplant designers might take a lesson from it, one bhp/cu. in. and all! Corvettes, whether doctored up by the factory or individuals or left in stock condition, have a reputation for failing to complete races owing to engine failure. Respectable twowheeled machines have closer to one and a half horsepower per cubic inch. If this is what I must sacrifice to eliminate vibration that I don't find objectionable, I think I'll buy a vibrationless velocipede.
After re-reading this letter, I feel that I may seem to be trying to discredit Mr. Bond or that I dislike him. Nothing could be more wrong. In my opinion he publishes the leading automobile chronicle in this country and he has written many superb and knowledgeable editorials for it. May I be first in line to say that he knows a lot about cars and their engines. AUBREY SOPER New Orleans, La.
H ALF-FACT, AS A MATTER OF FACT Recently a very startling fact has been brought to my attention concerning your magazine. It seems to me, and many of my friends, that your magazine has almost entirely neglected the American realm of the sport. Things would be fine and dandy if CYCLE WORLD was published in Japan, England, or somewhere in Europe. But the fact remains CW is an American magazine which should be at least somewhat in connection with American machines, riders, and races.
My main gripe is that by reading your own "foreign" propaganda I get the feeling that you think European riders and machines are far superior to our own. Let's get CYCLE WORLD concerned with the "home" front before delving into endless reports on European obscurities. Also, it is my belief that it is about time the American rider with the American machines had a crack at the boys overseas, whom you have made to be invincible. GREG A. MAIGA Thomaston, Conn.
You mean like the reports on Day tona in this issue, where about 98% of the competitors, mostly Americans, were riding foreign-made bikes? You had better take your head out of the sand; the part left sticking out makes quite a target. Ed.
INTELLIGENT MOTORCYCLING WORKS "Intelligent Motorcycling" mentioned painting of helmets. I haven't had a car pull out in front of me for the last three years. I attribute this to my blinding bright helmet. I have it painted day-glow red with a clear overlay to give it gloss and brightness. Added to this is a scallop design of white scotch-lite tape. When the sun is up the red shows, at night the white glows. When going under street lights or when headlights cross it, it shows up well too. The design is so obvious it is distracting to motorists.
A friend of mine asked the other day if he had seen me go by on a certain street. I said yes, and he added, "I thought so; when I was coming out on Broadway I saw a red spot go by." He didn't even see me, just a red spot. You can take it from one who's learned to the tune of a smashed bike and broken ankle. Make that helmet as bright and eye-catching as possible and keep it on your head where people can see it. JOHN D. WIEMER Cape Girardeau, Mo.
SEMICONDUCTOR LIMITATIONS I would like to comment on your article in the April issue, "On the Use of Semiconductors in Motorcycle Electrical Systems." The suggested use of a zener diode for a shunt is a good idea as far as it goes. However most commercial grade zeners available have a plus or minus 10% tolerance. This means that a nominal 12 volt zener could range from 10.8 volts to 13.2 volts. For use with a 12 volt battery, a charging voltage of 14.2 volts is normal; needless to say, zeners do not come in this rating. Another engineer and myself have been toying with this same problem for quite some time now. One solution is to use a transistor to carry the heavy current in the shunt circuit. The zener can be used to control the voltage level of the transistor, and inexpensive normal diodes can be introduced in series with the zener to adjust the voltage. Normal diodes have a forward voltage drop of about .1 to .2 volts. Thus voltage can be set in small increments. In the schematic attached, the battery could be replaced by a 2 ohm 100 watt resistor. This schematic has been under test for several months now, and seems to be performing its function well. It is used on a 305 Honda, and has reduced battery filling from once every 500 miles to once every 2000. I anticipate an extended battery life from this voltage regulator, but I do not now have enough miles on the battery to establish how much longer it will last. This same circuit might be adapted to the English six volt system by suitable choice of zener and balancing resistors. I have noted that most standard machines, equipped with alternator, will tend to overcharge the battery when used for long periods at high speeds. This regulator should help that problem. TERRENCE DOWELL Los Angeles, Calif.
(Continued on page 36)
TRAIL BIKE CONTROVERSY As an experienced trail bike rider, and a long time member of the Sierra Club, I feel somewhat torn. I used to take one of those English twins into the dirt quite a bit. I don't think the conflict is necessarily quite as sharp as is made out. At least in California, most of the dirt riding is done in desert areas where, for lack of water, relatively few hikers go anyhow . . . they concentrate in high country where it is virtually impossible to ride. However, there is a wide middle range of country suitable to both . . . and here I think you have not stressed, as it should be, the importance of silencing. One enthusiastic Greeves (say) rapping its way through the hills, completely destroys, for as long as it's there, the atmosphere of quiet beauty which makes a wilderness area so valuable. With adequate muffling, bikes could take to the wilderness without driving everything and everybody else out. I think you could do a lot to help make this clear to all concerned. STUART ALLAN Berkeley, Calif.
HONDA OWNERS AT I.O.M. The Honda Owners Club of Great Britain is holding an International Rally for Honda enthusiasts in the Isle of Man during TT week this year, and in view of your magazine's International circulation we wonder if you would be interested in informing your readers that any Honda rider is most cordially invited. Several Honda riders of different nationalities were met in the Island last year and we are taking the time to extend International control to the event. M. ROGERS General Secretary Honda Owners Club of Great Britain Birmingham, England
OVERLY INSENSITIVE Re "Cycle Round Up," December '64 CW, the Editor is correct when he states that he is overly sensitive concerning darts thrown at American motorcyclists. I recall two previous International Six Days Trial reports by CW contributors, Sloniger and Heinz J. Schneider, who were not shy at dart-throwing towards the staid old British.
The reports regarding the Drag Festival as I see it prove nothing unless the number eight hat Americans build their own twowheel sling shots instead of using British motorcycles.
Riding gear comments are school boy stuff when one considers the two climates involved. Regarding the "impressive image" as CW's Editor describes the U.S. first team effort, I don't agree. The American today is unpopular enough around the world, without including the American motorcycle rider. I might remind the Editor that there are a few other motorcyclists in the U.S. outside of California. CW is a good media for discussing motorcycles, why spoil it with petty schoolboy articles? RICHARD MAUGHAN Plainview, N.Y.
It's pretty plain you didn't. read what the British press, in some cases, had to say. We can't relate their insulting remarks to the minor criticism our correspondents leveled in previous I.S.D.T. reports; how can you? The British made some petty, jealous and childish remarks. Maybe YOU don't want to defend American motorcycling, hut WE do. The motorcycle riders outside of California are a pretty familiar group of friends; most of our readers are among them. How can we comment on motorcycles in competition without mentioning their riders? The two seem inseparable to us. Ed.
ESO OUT WEST I thought maybe you would like to follow up on how an Eso is also loved on the West Coast (CW, April '65). This race-winning masterpiece has brought much joy to my Sunday afternoons by winning more times than not, and without much mechanical upkeep. Racing here in Southern California is at much higher speeds than back East and the Eso's ability is as good if not better than on the rougher tracks. T.he interest has been great around the tracks and everyone wants to know what it is and where it came from.
Only changes in my bike from stock are handlebars, tires, gears and a 19-inch front wheel. The engine is absolutely stock. If it doesn't win one can only blame old "Doug," not the 285-pound stormer. L.M. "DOUG" DOUGLAS San Bernardino, Calif.
FROM UNDER A ROCK You and the other cycle publications, to a lesser degree, are trying to destroy the very thing that makes motorcycling so much fun. You won't be happy until everyone is riding a 50cc motorbike and wearing a tuxedo. Recently while riding on a 650cc BSA with a friend of mine we encountered a 1955 Ford station wagon at a stoplight. This creep had the nerve to sneer at us, as if he could put us down! This fellow must have been tangling with your motor bikes for quite a while.
When a prospective rider (guy) imagines himself a rider, he sees himself on a big, chrome powerhouse, with everyone admiring him, openly or secretly. Every girl in every social class flips over bikes. This did not come about because of 50cc machines, but because of big, bad HarleyDavidsons.
(Continued on page 38)
You really do feature Harleys don't you, as you told Mr. Boomhower in the March issue. I looked closely at every page in both the February and March issues, this is the complete sum of what I found about H-D: two 1" x 2" ads (one in each), two sick cartoons about H-D (one in each). If the "funnies" were in a mag that features H-D I would call them funny, coming from you they STINK. Hurray for Mrs. Kay F. Thomas, I agree with her completely. If you want to salvage your mag (it's really pretty good), start featuring H-D and some custom street machines, ape hangers and all. Why not change your name to Motor Bike World, Haters Of American Machines? DANIEL S. RINK JR. Brooklyn, N.Y.
Though it pains us to continue this stupid feud, we continue to receive stupid letters, so ask a stupid question and you receive a stupid answer. If you will look at the issues just prior to, and right after, i.e.: January and May, you will see several portions devoted to Harley-Davidson. In addition, H-D has a full page ad in every issue. Must we keep on forever pointing out that Harleys are just fine, but after all they are only one line of machines among almost hundreds. As for your ideas of what constitutes manhood on a motorcycle, please take your psychiatric problems to someone more qualified to answer. Incidentally, what's wrong with us having a sense of humor, a human trait you are evidently devoid of? Lastly, you had better re-examine some of those "little" machines you seem to resent, particularly their performance capabilities. You are due for a surprise. Ed.
LIMITED READERS I do not and will not subscribe to CYCLE WORLD simply because I enjoy the ride to my local dealer's showroom as well as the ensuing browse through his display and the resulting chance of making new friends.
I think the worst problem you have to surmount is the limited intelligence evidenced by your readers and their letters. Let's hope that the general public does not get to that section of your publication until they have enjoyed the thrill of a ride on a good bike. A casual reader would, if he believed your mail, rapidly get the impression that the Editor is in the midst of a crusade to ban the firm of HarleyDavidson from the face of the earth, promote the disbanding of the Motor Maids, and lastly, that he has proven himself the greatest clot of all by poking a hole in that holy of holies, The Vincent.
Are all of your readers so narrow and provincial that they do not appreciate good reporting and editorial honesty? It would appear that, with the exception of a few notable contributors, you are deluged with a great deal ol pure garbage from your readers and I think they may only read your magazine to have a subject to abuse. I for one appreciate the effort that goes into your reports. True, few people are privileged to work at a craft which is also a love, but no one should be abused for being so fortunate. Enough support of the Editor, he defends himself quite well. One of your readers requested information on the Brought Superior. I suggest he contact Mr. Harry Louis, Editor, Motor Cycle, Dorset House, Stamford St., London S.E.I, England. I eventually hope to join the ranks of Vincent and Brough owners and I assure you that you have in no way dimmed my desire and appreciation for these enthusiasts' machines. Only the fools believe that anyone will become disabused of their personal prejudices by reading truthful reports of test machines. All machines have disadvantages, even mine, but that is what makes enthusiasm. I am the owner of some unpopular machines and I assure you that I love them for their failings as well as their accomplishments. In fact my machines are so unpopular that no one cares to stock parts in this country. This is again an advantage as it broadens one's knowledge to have to contact several sources abroad in search of bits, and makes reading Motor Cycle mandatory. This is another fine publication with which I am sure you are more than passingly familiar.
(Continued on page 40)
My freak machines are a 1952 MAC Velocette, a 1957 Ariel 4/G MK 11, a 1939 Ariel 4/G, and the common one, a 1963 Triumph TR-6. The '57 square is in excellent shape and is open for a road test whenever you are. The '39 soon will be, as it is in the process of restoration and is waiting for a few bits from the homeland. While not stock, it is yet a most enjoyable machine from my point of view.
Please continue the good work and let us hope that the level of your readers' intelligence rises apace with the improving image of the sport, for which we must all work. AUSTIN MUNGER Sierra Madre, Calif.
HE DIDN'T MAKE IT On page 88 of the April issue of CYCLE WORLD there is a photo of a rider in a slide. A friend of mine and I have had a discussion regarding this photo. His opinion is that the rider has temporarily lost control and either went down or had to pause long enough to upright the machine before continuing the race. Please settle it for us. ED BROWN Kerrwood, 111.
Unfortunately he went down, without injury. About 10 mph more and he would have made it. Ed.
VINCENTS ANYONE? I howled with laughter at the indignant responses you received after your recent Black Lightning Vincent test. While you left your basic point unproved, you conclusively proved another: all Vincent enthusiasts read your magazine!
I own three Vincents in mint condition, an "A", "C", and "D". Also, I used to sell them in Panama many years ago. I have yet to see one that I could either keep a clutch working or shift rapidly at high speed. I'll be delighted if some one would show me how. If you want to test any or all of them, I'll ship them to you for a month. Meanwhile, keep up the good work; your publication improves with every issue. JOHN E. FIELD Honda/Triumph Hawaii Honolulu, Hawaii Thank you kindly Mr. Field, we just may take you up on the offer shortly. Ed.
BUT, NO, IT GOES ON .. . Have been a subscriber to your magazine since the first issue, and think it is the best. I especially enjoy your road tests.
In all fairness to Harley-Davidson, I don't believe your April '65 issue test of the HD-XLH should have been released to the public. Many cycle enthusiasts use these test results as comparisons to other models. I'm sure that the Triumph TT Special which you tested was properly tuned and checked out before being presented to you for a road test.
Would it be possible for you to road test an H-D XLR-TT, possibly set up by a competition dealer such as Slim Karns of Long Beach? To my knowledge this model has never been tested by a magazine. You may recall Jim Goldsmith rode this bike with great success in 1960 in TT and scrambles events.
If this bike, properly tuned and capably ridden is tested by you, I think you will find out that it will outperform any model you have previously tested. Why not give it and Harley-Davidson a fair try? CARL R. WEIS Canton, Ohio
As a regular reader we are a bit surprised at your lack of knowledge of our test procedures. We have not as yet tested an XLR-TT, but we tested the KR-TT which was prepared and tuned by the very same H-D agency, Long Beach Harley-Davidson, and the man who did all of the work was the very capable Jerry Branch. Perhaps one day soon we can arrange it, it sounds like fun; but tests of special racing machines such cis the KR-TT, XLR-TT and the Triumph TT Special, take a back seat to our primary function, that of evaluating production motorcycles right off the dealer's floor. We place far more importance on the fact that the machines are the very same ones that over one million riders are using. As for the XLH test, prepare yourself for a surprise: it was borrowed from Long Beach Harley-Davidson's Slim Karns, prepared and tuned by the very same Jerry Branch, and was an excellent example of the XLH. You didn't elaborate on why you don't think the test should have been published, but we assume you mean it should have gone faster. We also aren't certain what you mean by "capably ridden." We still do all of our own riding, including the KR-TT which was so fast it scared the hell out of all of us. We still don't see where we haven't always given H-D a fair chance, the same as "we give all the others. Ed. •
