If It Ain't A Harley...

[sprintster]

I've owned bikes for the last 30 years since I was 17 so class myself as a "biker"
I have absolutely NO interest in cars,I own a Rav 4 because I do actually go off-road gathering firewood and live in the Scottish highlands(good in summer,not so good in winter).I can't see a Lamborghini being much good for either.Why spend £100k on a car just to spend most of your time stuck behind Mondeo man.
If I did have a spare £100k I'd be spending maybe £30k on a 4x4 and the rest on a wide selection of bikes!
And if my wife would rather be posing in a Lamborghini than on the back of bike I wouldn't have married her!

[sprintster]

I've owned bikes for the last 30 years since I was 17 so class myself as a "biker"
I have absolutely NO interest in cars,I own a Rav 4 because I do actually go off-road gathering firewood and live in the Scottish highlands(good in summer,not so good in winter).I can't see a Lamborghini being much good for either.Why spend £100k on a car just to spend most of your time stuck behind Mondeo man.
If I did have a spare £100k I'd be spending maybe £30k on a 4x4 and the rest on a wide selection of bikes!
And if my wife would rather be posing in a Lamborghini than on the back of bike I wouldn't have married her!

[sprintster]

.

[sprintster]

.

[sprintster]

.

[AndyB]

I'll always choose to use a bike rather than a car if I can. Cars are just functional things that take you to work or to the nearest supermarket but as far as I'm concerned they're dull and no matter what the badge stuck on the front they don't have any appeal.

As for being transport for the poor; that'd be why I keep hearing people tell me they wish they could afford a motorbike.

What people mean maybe is that they can't afford a motorcycle and a car. The people I was talking about are those who can only afford a motorcycle. A real motorcyle, and not a toy like most of us lucky enough to

No, these are young lads who want a motorbike but can't afford one so get a car. Insurance is the killer along with the fact that they'd be using it to get to work so don't want a £500 pile of problems.

It's not cheap to start out on a bike at 17 then work your way up to something you could confidently use to go away to Europe with your mates.

You're talking about people who can afford a car so they get one instead of a motorcycle. It is cheap to start on a real motorcycle. I'm talking about people whose only choice is a real motorcyle and even a small car is for the seriously rich. The idea of going away to Europe with your mates would be unimaginable. Your "£500" would be the average annual income for the vast majority of the world's labour force and a lot lower for most. The point is we don't know how lucky we are to afford our toys. That is what I mean by motorcycles are for the poor.

Yeah, you're right. I disregard 3rd World countries because I only go there if I'm being paid so I just assume that when someone says motorbikes are for poor people they mean over here where cars are the cheapest way to get yourself mobile if you're 17 years of age.

[bull]

Remember that a Cessna 152 was once an unproven modern technical piece of sh*t.

no, it wasn't


because the Cessna 152 came out sometime in the 1970s

but the Cessna 150 and the Cessna 172 came out in the 1950s, so they did,

so the Cessna was already a proven aircraft by the time the 152 was released, you see

[badsanta]

Remember that a Cessna 152 was once an unproven modern technical piece of sh*t.

no, it wasn't


because the Cessna 152 came out sometime in the 1970s

but the Cessna 150 and the Cessna 172 came out in the 1950s, so they did,

so the Cessna was already a proven aircraft by the time the 152 was released, you see

What I mean is that everything made by humans was once new fangled technological sh*t no matter what it is, and one day the stuff we now consider as "new" will be proven or failed

[badsanta]

I've owned bikes for the last 30 years since I was 17 so class myself as a "biker"
I have absolutely NO interest in cars,I own a Rav 4 because I do actually go off-road gathering firewood and live in the Scottish highlands(good in summer,not so good in winter).I can't see a Lamborghini being much good for either.Why spend £100k on a car just to spend most of your time stuck behind Mondeo man.
If I did have a spare £100k I'd be spending maybe £30k on a 4x4 and the rest on a wide selection of bikes!
And if my wife would rather be posing in a Lamborghini than on the back of bike I wouldn't have married her!

If you have no interest in cars why do you have a Rav4? You could use a two wheel drive sidecar outfit like a Ural to collect your wood. They will go anywhere a Rav 4 can and a lot of places it can't. The reason to spend 100k on a car is you can afford it and one will have a chaffeur to drive the Toyota Rav 4 or preferably a Porsche Cayenne to collect the firewood on one's estate. I'm talking about people who wouldn't allow the chaffeur to drive something so cheap as a Toyota. I wish I was in that club. I have a car as well as bike and a real biker (and I know only one and he would be approx the same age as you if my addition is right)doesn't have a car,only a motorcyle. If your wife was posing in her own Lamborghini and not on the back of someone else's motorcycle then I'd have married her.

[Dazzer]

I'm amazed ! We have managed to get to page 6 got right off the subject and still no one's mentioned Charlie Boreman (thumbs)