Son down (mildly)

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:46:41 +0100, Ace <seesig.TakeThisOut@ifrance.com> wrote:

>>And it's easy enough to avoid French Canucks
>
>Not sure what's wrong wiv 'em anyway, TBH.

They've got an even bigger chip on their shoulder than euro frenchies


--
Champ
I don't know, but I been told, you never slow down, you never get old
ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R600 (race)
neal at champ dot org dot uk
 >> Stay informed about: Son down (mildly) 

Champ wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:46:41 +0100, Ace <seesig RemoveThis @ifrance.com> wrote:
>
>>> And it's easy enough to avoid French Canucks
>>
>> Not sure what's wrong wiv 'em anyway, TBH.
>
> They've got an even bigger chip on their shoulder than euro frenchies
>

Well at least the Eskimos slap them down when they get stroppy.

--
Hog
'03 ST4S '96 Bastard12 '89 R100RS '81 XS650 '78 RD400
 >> Stay informed about: Son down (mildly) 

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:52:56 +0000, in
<v5mds35089ifr793jcg1asjevqmr1dl44e.RemoveThis@4ax.com>, Champ
<news.RemoveThis@champ.org.uk> wrote:

>On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:46:41 +0100, Ace <seesig.RemoveThis@ifrance.com> wrote:
>
>>>And it's easy enough to avoid French Canucks
>>
>>Not sure what's wrong wiv 'em anyway, TBH.
>
>They've got an even bigger chip on their shoulder than euro frenchies
>

But the real frogs regard them as inferior in a big way. I remember
being in a (real) French restaurant in Montreal one time, where the
waiter assumed from my accent (speaking French to him, of course) that
I was local, and gave me the snooty treatment the North Americans seem
to think is typical of the French. Then he told me the wine I'd
ordered was unavailable and recommended another one of a similar type,
only to be utterly flabbergasted when I said I'd ridden through the
village it came from on my way to or from one of our ukrm trips.

Once he found I actually lived here, his manner changed completely
into a much more friendly mode, much to the annoyance of other
Canadians sitting nearby

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (b.rogers at ifrance.com)
\`\ | /`/ DS#8 BOTAFOT#3 SbS#2 UKRMMA#13 DFV#8 SKA#2 IBB#10
`\\ | //'
`\|/`
`
 >> Stay informed about: Son down (mildly) 

Ace wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:35:36 +0000, in
> <55lds3drpsh5mkf90a9nusqd6uid0asrl6.RemoveThis@4ax.com>, Champ
> <news.RemoveThis@champ.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:29:10 -0000, "Hog" <hogSPAM.RemoveThis@freenetCHIPS.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>
>>> Canada, like America without any of the benefits and added French cunts.
>> I'd say Canada is like America without any of the drawbacks.
>
> Absolutely. No (or not too many) americans, for a start. And they
> actually have a clue about food as well.
>
>> And it's easy enough to avoid French Canucks
>
> Not sure what's wrong wiv 'em anyway, TBH.
>
I always found them to be a bit more relaxed than the Anglophones.
 >> Stay informed about: Son down (mildly) 

"Hog" <hogSPAM.RemoveThis@freenetCHIPS.co.uk> wrote in message
news:62o4mkF24fa8jU1@mid.individual.net...
> Charlie wrote:
>> "Canada could have enjoyed: English government, French culture and
>> American know-how. Instead it ended up with: English know-how,
>> French government and American culture."
>
> That's actually rather good ;o)

John Robert Colombo, whoever he is. <checks> "Canadian poet, editor and
humourist".

Americans are benevolently ignorant about Canada, while Canadians are
malevolently well informed about the United States.
J. Bartlett Brebner [professor of history at Columbia]
 >> Stay informed about: Son down (mildly) 

In message <62o4k4F23g4l4U1.RemoveThis@mid.individual.net>, Hog
<hogSPAM.RemoveThis@freenetCHIPS.co.uk> writes
>Champ wrote:
>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:29:10 -0000, "Hog" <hogSPAM.RemoveThis@freenetCHIPS.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ace wrote:
>>>
>>>> I drive in snowy conditions for much of the winter (here in
>>>> Switzerland, as well as several weeks in BC/Alberta in recent years)
>>>> and can state most assuredly that ABS works very well indeed on
>>>> slippery surfaces, especially when combined with 4wd and traction
>>>> control.
>>>
>>> Canada, like America without any of the benefits and added French
>>> cunts.
>>
>> I'd say Canada is like America without any of the drawbacks. And it's
>> easy enough to avoid French Canucks - just go west.
>
>I've spent more time there and have more rellies than you I assume then!
>
>Backwards socialist pseudo bhal cunts, every last elk of them, well until it
>comes to forest destruction.
>
>BC is breathtakingly gorgeous though.
>
Indeed BC is wonderful. I can vouch for the Yukon too.
--
Tim
http://www.pitfieldbeershop.co.uk/
 >> Stay informed about: Son down (mildly) 

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 13:40:51 GMT, "platypus"
<monotreme DeleteThis @blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:


>> Hmm. So, would you describe all the other bikes that have better[1]
>> rear brakes as 'unbalanced'?
>
>Normally, you don't need a monstrously powerful rear brake, because you'll
>either be using the front on its own, or both brakes together.

Understood.

> Also, it's a
>single-leading-shoe drum. If it was TLS, it would be great going forward,
>and almost entirely ineffective going backwards. It's a compromise.

The backwards bit would be for holding the bike on hills / ramps etc?

>It
>wasn't designed to stop a trailer.

Understood and I'm not expecting it to do so with 'ease' but even
without the trailer the rear brake has never been what I would
describe as even 'good'. Ok yes, good, not really.
>
>> Well, the case with the trailer maybe yes (other than the XV750
>> dealing with it ok) but it's still not 'good' without the trailer
>> (from my pov anyway).
>
>Cruisers tend to see harder rear brake use anyway. On my Drifter, I got
>through rear pads faster than fronts.

Ok, well that might explain why the XV750 is so much better then.

> Do you actually use your fronts much
>on the RT, or is there a recommended trailer technique?

I generally use the front with the rear and am aware most of the
stopping power is with the front. Not just because of it being twin
disk but general weight distribution. When towing we are normally also
fully laden and two up so *could* use the rear more .. but there isn't
any 'more'.
>
>> Anyroadup, as I mentioned previously the 900 Divvy I borrowed from the
>> local bike shop for a week (with the idea of one replacing the RT and
>> also had a very good rear brake) went back hardly ridden because it
>> had no character, so the old girl stays.
>
>The Divvy has a disc rear.

As I guessed it might be.

Maybe the Airhead riders here are lucky in that their rear brakes are
good ones somehow. There are also many riders on the various Airhead /
general BM lists / groups / clubs that seem to agree with my findings
and that the rear is (can be?) more of a holding than stopping brake?

Like I said, I have ridden a fair few 'basic' bikes in my time, bikes
that aren't particularly known to be over braked but I have never felt
the rear as lacking (being able to lock all the others without to much
effort) as I do with this RT. Before the mono I had an old R100RT
twinshock (done up as a 90S by the po) for a couple of months and even
though it later transpired the rear caliper was partly seized it was
still more like what I'd expect a rear brake to be!

I'm not saying having some form of efficiency related ABS on the rear
is always a bad thing but personally I'd prefer to have the choice of
being able to lock the rear wheel (especially under heavy braking) and
let my skill and experience (however small <g>) manage the situation
at that point. Maybe if the rear could do it's share easier I might
not get into a situation in the first place?

My point is, if I got off the BM and got on the MZ ETZ 251 Saxon Tour,
the CB 250, the 350 Bullet or her XV750 Virago I ended up over braking
on the rear for the first couple of stops because they were so much
lighter and could lock the rear wheel without me putting all 6'2" and
16st on the pedal ???

Not a problem though, I can cope, but if there was anything I could
change on the old girl, that would be it.

All the best ..

T i m
 >> Stay informed about: Son down (mildly) 

T i m wrote:
>
> Maybe the Airhead riders here are lucky in that their rear brakes are
> good ones somehow. There are also many riders on the various Airhead /
> general BM lists / groups / clubs that seem to agree with my findings
> and that the rear is (can be?) more of a holding than stopping brake?
>
> Like I said, I have ridden a fair few 'basic' bikes in my time, bikes
> that aren't particularly known to be over braked but I have never felt
> the rear as lacking (being able to lock all the others without to much
> effort) as I do with this RT. Before the mono I had an old R100RT
> twinshock (done up as a 90S by the po) for a couple of months and even
> though it later transpired the rear caliper was partly seized it was
> still more like what I'd expect a rear brake to be!
>
> I'm not saying having some form of efficiency related ABS on the rear
> is always a bad thing but personally I'd prefer to have the choice of
> being able to lock the rear wheel (especially under heavy braking) and
> let my skill and experience (however small <g>) manage the situation
> at that point. Maybe if the rear could do it's share easier I might
> not get into a situation in the first place?
>
> My point is, if I got off the BM and got on the MZ ETZ 251 Saxon Tour,
> the CB 250, the 350 Bullet or her XV750 Virago I ended up over braking
> on the rear for the first couple of stops because they were so much
> lighter and could lock the rear wheel without me putting all 6'2" and
> 16st on the pedal ???

It sounds like your back brake is fuct. The standard BMW back brake is
competent. If you've tried new shoes and wheel, the next place to look at
is setup. Who has worked on the brake, and would you consider them
competent?
 >> Stay informed about: Son down (mildly) 

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:03:03 GMT, "platypus"
<monotreme.RemoveThis@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:


>> My point is, if I got off the BM and got on the MZ ETZ 251 Saxon Tour,
>> the CB 250, the 350 Bullet or her XV750 Virago I ended up over braking
>> on the rear for the first couple of stops because they were so much
>> lighter and could lock the rear wheel without me putting all 6'2" and
>> 16st on the pedal ???
>
>It sounds like your back brake is fuct.

Oh?

>The standard BMW back brake is
>competent.

Well, I think the jury might be out on that in some quarters (and not
just mine)

> If you've tried new shoes and wheel, the next place to look at
>is setup. Who has worked on the brake, and would you consider them
>competent?

Me and reasonably yes (have done my all my own vehicle maintenance,
always. Built a kit car 18 years ago and it's still running etc etc).
I fitted the modified one way clutch spring in my ex wifes C50LA (3
speed fully automatic) because my local shop didn't fancy the job at
the time (it was like a Swiss watch in there!)

It's hardly rocket science in there. New shoes (at least 3 different
'brands') and never contaminated during installation (never handled
with greasy hands). All pivots and linkages clean properly lubed and
free moving. All actions set at 90 deg etc. Brake light comes on half
way between pedal at rest and the brake actually starting to touch
etc.

On that note the brake light switch is a bugger to get to, up inside
the rhs rear frame and beside the monolever, often covered in shite
and therefore can fail easily. I fabricated a removable bracket in
stainless so the whole switch assembly could be dropped out easily for
servicing. It doesn't impact on the brake action.

I replaced the rear wheel for three reasons. Firstly I gathered a
slight 'dent' in the rim curtsey of a fairly large pothole somewhere
(it even shook one touring pannier lid open). Secondly there were some
strange pits (possibly either some form of corrosion or more probably
some impurities in the steel in the original steel drum insert ( BMW
did inspect it but didn't feel it warranted replacing .. but then they
weren't riding it ..) and lastly because it gave me a chance to start
with a new drum and shoes to see if it would improve the braking
efficiency (it didn't).

All the best ..

T i m
 >> Stay informed about: Son down (mildly) 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Son down (mildly)