|
Author |
Message |
badinfluence63 |
Post subject: Re: Better shocks, convenience or necessity? Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 3:32 pm |
|
|
Road Captian |
|
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 9:51 am Posts: 1966 |
|
|
I found a rigid to be doomed in the reliability department. Why? Vibration has to go somewhere and on a rigid I found it always went to the path of least resisistance. If you secured you nuts and bolts it would eventually tear weak spots in the sheet metal.
To expect to be perfect is unreasonable, to strive for perfection is reasonable. 2015 Ultra Classic Low.
|
|
Top |
|
|
The Tourist |
Post subject: Re: Better shocks, convenience or necessity? Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:43 am |
|
Banned |
|
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 8:05 pm Posts: 1286 |
|
|
I agree. But I thought about something after we spoke on the telephone.
It appears that you and I have modified just about every bike we have ever owned. In fact, I am now scanning a picture of that 1976 Kawasaki LTD I had. Big Japanese fours were the rage at that time, and there was a horsepower race going on--Honda built a big yellow monstrosity with a four-into-one. I got caught up in it like everyone else.
Same with rigid frames. They had a cleaner look, we started cuttting and welding and trying to make them work. I could never understand why a guy bought a rigid frame and then took a thin little seat and bolted it down on the frame with no springs at all.
You live, you learn. That's why I got into Dyna Glides. I thought they handled and rode the best.
"Imagine a king who fights his own battles. Wouldn't that be a sight?" Brad Pitt as Achilles in the movie 'Troy'
|
|
Top |
|
|
|
|