ninjette.org - View Single Post

choneofakind · September 21st, 2014, 04:35 PM

But you're missing the point. Until I see data from their design work, I will consider it sketchy. Why?

Because 1) we don't know hw reliable it is. We don't know what factors of safety they used or how it compares to stock in that aspect. We don't know what forces or impacts they were intending to design for.

2) we don't know how much work they put into keeping the character of the bike the same, ie, how much vibration damping and flex this new frame has in comparison to stock.

Ever ridden a chrome-moly bicycle and compared to an aluminum bicycle and then compared to a carbon bicycle back to back to back? The chromy bike is flexy and willowy, yet very comfortable compared to the aluminum, but it could go either way compared to the carbon. Is it possible that all three bicycles have the same dimensions? yes. Will they all work for making you sweat and not die from catastrophic frame failure and get you transportation/exercise? likely. But those three bicycles will all feel completely different to the rider, and it's obvious to even the most casual rider that something feels different about each bike. Maybe they aren't as anal-retentive about picking out each individual little aspect that makes each frame different, but they'll be able to hop off and say 'wow, that one felt really uncomfortable" or "this one feels softer and does go as fast when I stand up and crank".

The company that makes these custom half frames, while they're probably safe due to real world testing, likely changed the whole character of how that chassis responds and feels.

3) I frankly just don't trust a gigantic modification like this as anything other than a last resort. That's a huge change that takes your bike from a production vehicle with a history and a safety record to a motorcycle that is essentially a kit vehicle, built by an aftermarket company.

There's just a lot to design around when making a vehicle, and until I see what they did, I would not trust it. Designing a chassis to behave with a certain character and building a chassis that will support a motor and mate with the rear subframe are two very different things. Sure, both work, but they are NOT interchangeable solutions to the problem.

EDIT: sorry for the rant(s) here, but as you can tell, I strongly dislike when people tell me that thing x was built and works, so clearly it's good enough. I dislike being told that 'it works, so it's good enough'. Farmers fix tractors and fences to be 'good enough'.

September 21st, 2014, 04:35 PM	#16
choneofakind ninjette.org certified postwhore Name: . Location: . Join Date: Feb 2011 Motorcycle(s): . Posts: Too much. MOTM - Feb '13, Feb '14	But you're missing the point. Until I see data from their design work, I will consider it sketchy. Why? Because 1) we don't know hw reliable it is. We don't know what factors of safety they used or how it compares to stock in that aspect. We don't know what forces or impacts they were intending to design for. 2) we don't know how much work they put into keeping the character of the bike the same, ie, how much vibration damping and flex this new frame has in comparison to stock. Ever ridden a chrome-moly bicycle and compared to an aluminum bicycle and then compared to a carbon bicycle back to back to back? The chromy bike is flexy and willowy, yet very comfortable compared to the aluminum, but it could go either way compared to the carbon. Is it possible that all three bicycles have the same dimensions? yes. Will they all work for making you sweat and not die from catastrophic frame failure and get you transportation/exercise? likely. But those three bicycles will all feel completely different to the rider, and it's obvious to even the most casual rider that something feels different about each bike. Maybe they aren't as anal-retentive about picking out each individual little aspect that makes each frame different, but they'll be able to hop off and say 'wow, that one felt really uncomfortable" or "this one feels softer and does go as fast when I stand up and crank". The company that makes these custom half frames, while they're probably safe due to real world testing, likely changed the whole character of how that chassis responds and feels. 3) I frankly just don't trust a gigantic modification like this as anything other than a last resort. That's a huge change that takes your bike from a production vehicle with a history and a safety record to a motorcycle that is essentially a kit vehicle, built by an aftermarket company. There's just a lot to design around when making a vehicle, and until I see what they did, I would not trust it. Designing a chassis to behave with a certain character and building a chassis that will support a motor and mate with the rear subframe are two very different things. Sure, both work, but they are NOT interchangeable solutions to the problem. EDIT: sorry for the rant(s) here, but as you can tell, I strongly dislike when people tell me that thing x was built and works, so clearly it's good enough. I dislike being told that 'it works, so it's good enough'. Farmers fix tractors and fences to be 'good enough'.