data.3news-bydate.test.rec.motorcycles.103180 Maven / Gradle / Ivy
From: [email protected] (Blaine Gardner)
Subject: Re: Why I won't be getting my Low Rider this year
Keywords: congratz
Article-I.D.: dsd.1993Apr6.044018.23281
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Lines: 23
Nntp-Posting-Host: bambam
In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (charles.a.rogers) writes:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Peter Ahrens) writes:
>> That would be low drag bars and way rad rearsets for the FJ, so that the
>> ergonomic constraints would have contraceptive consequences?
>
>Ouch. :-) This brings to mind one of the recommendations in the
>Hurt Study. Because the rear of the gas tank is in close proximity
>to highly prized and easily damaged anatomy, Hurt et al recommended
>that manufacturers build the tank so as to reduce the, er, step function
>provided when the rider's body slides off of the seat and onto the
>gas tank in the unfortunate event that the bike stops suddenly and the
>rider doesn't. I think it's really inspiring how the manufacturers
>have taken this advice to heart in their design of bikes like the
>CBR900RR and the GTS1000A.
I dunno, on my old GS1000E the tank-seat junction was nice and smooth.
But if you were to travel all the way forward, you'd collect the top
triple-clamp in a sensitive area. I'd hate to have to make the choice,
but I think I'd prefer the FJ's gas tank. :-)
--
Blaine Gardner @ Evans & Sutherland
[email protected]