Kevin Cameron column in "Cycle World" this month....

[Lannis]

I always have liked Kevin Cameron's writing in the mags over the years.   

He really hit the nail on the head with this one this month.   Basically talking about how us Luddites decry any new technology on bikes, from the replacement of atmospheric-operated intake valves by spring operated ones, to automatic oil pumps instead of hand pumps, overhead valves, disk brakes, FI,  up through CVTs, and how people claim that "It will be the end of real motorcycling!".

Anyway, if you get a chance, you'll see some familiar stuff in there ... because WE talk about it all the time!

Lannis

[Rough Edge racing]

 His books and columns are great reading....He really brings technology to life.

[dilligaf]

Oh!  So now we are going to beat up on Luddites.  ::(  :BEER:
Matt

[Lannis]

Oh!  So now we are going to beat up on Luddites.  ::(  :BEER:
Matt

"US" Luddites!  And proud we are of it too.  ;-T

[oldmxdog61u]

Luddite? Isn't that amish for guzzista?

[Late to the party]

Luddite? Isn't that amish for guzzista?

There. He said it.

Off to the races we go.

Lateness.

[handyandy]

Is luddite another word for old fart?

[oldmxdog61u]

Actually,  luddite is what you say holding your tongue trying to say
Bud light.

[Stormtruck2]

Kevin Cameron?  Wasn't he in Growing Pains??? ~;

[lucydad]

Poor Luds,

Stuck in the muds,

Gimme some ABS,

That ain't no BS. 

[rodekyll]

I have been described as a renaissance luddite.  I disagree.  I don't see the renaissance part.

[sturgeon]

Luddite? Isn't that amish for guzzista?

My Amish neighbours have some lovely 2 HP tractors  ;-T

[leafman60]

I have not yet seen that article.

I certainly do not ascribe to some of the silly examples of opposing most technological improvements in any machine or anything. My objections are:

1.  Technological improvements that don't work or cause break-downs. If such improvements are properly designed and tested and prove themselves in the field, then fine.

At first, I was very skeptical of electronic ignitions that replaced the points on my motorcycle. However, when the factory offered a system, I retro-fitted mine and kept my points set in the saddlebag. That electronic ignition is still in the bike, some 30 years later and the points set is on my parts shelf.

Only a foolish person would say that today's brakes, engines and frames are generally inferior in performance and longevity to items sold in the past.

2. Technological improvements that are superfluous or the purpose of which is to change characteristics that are appealing.  This is more a matter of subjective choice. One man's frivolity is another man's necessity.  

In my mind, I don't need or want an electronically-controlled automatic brake system that locks my rear brake on a hill and releases it with the clutch lever on take off. I don't need or want an automatic shifter. I don't need or want 6 cylinders, or even 4 for that matter, that produces a smooth sewing machine ride that bores me to tears. I don't want or need a host of other items construed as improvements by some people.  

On the other hand, I do like ABS braking, GPS navigation and I do like the convenience of heated grips and clothing during winter months.  Again, these sort of improvements or conveniences are a matter of choice.

A good friend of mine rides a new and well-known Japanese 6-cylinder touring bike that he loves and proudly exclaims is almost like riding along in his car.  Another friend rides and loves a European 6-cylinder bike that he loves because it is so smooth and has so many conveniences that he hardly has to strain a muscle to operate. By the way, he also has to fork over about $1000 a pop for standard service jobs.

I much prefer the characteristics of a Big Twin, European or American.

We have more than one example of modern and, yes, technologically advanced machines that continue to preserve the appealing characteristics offered in the past while adding reliability and performance for todays riders. You don't have to be a luddite to appreciate that.

[kevdog3019]

I have not yet seen that article.

I certainly do not ascribe to some of the silly examples of opposing most technological improvements in any machine or anything. My objections are:

1.  Technological improvements that don't work or cause break-downs. If such improvements are properly designed and tested and prove themselves in the field, then fine.

At first, I was very skeptical of electronic ignitions that replaced the points on my motorcycle. However, when the factory offered a system, I retro-fitted mine and kept my points set in the saddlebag. That electronic ignition is still in the bike, some 30 years later and the points set is on my parts shelf.

Only a foolish person would say that today's brakes, engines and frames are generally inferior in performance and longevity to items sold in the past.

2. Technological improvements that are superfluous or the purpose of which is to change characteristics that are appealing.  This is more a matter of subjective choice. One man's frivolity is another man's necessity.  

In my mind, I don't need or want an electronically-controlled automatic brake system that locks my rear brake on a hill and releases it with the clutch lever on take off. I don't need or want an automatic shifter. I don't need or want 6 cylinders, or even 4 for that matter, that produces a smooth sewing machine ride that bores me to tears. I don't want or need a host of other items construed as improvements by some people.  

On the other hand, I do like ABS braking, GPS navigation and I do like the convenience of heated grips and clothing during winter months.  Again, these sort of improvements or conveniences are a matter of choice.

A good friend of mine rides a new and well-known Japanese 6-cylinder touring bike that he loves and proudly exclaims is almost like riding along in his car.  Another friend rides and loves a European 6-cylinder bike that he loves because it is so smooth and has so many conveniences that he hardly has to strain a muscle to operate. By the way, he also has to fork over about $1000 a pop for standard service jobs.

I much prefer the characteristics of a Big Twin, European or American.

We have more than one example of modern and, yes, technologically advanced machines that continue to preserve the appealing characteristics offered in the past while adding reliability and performance for todays riders. You don't have to be a luddite to appreciate that.

Amen to this.   ;-T
Nice thing about taking an old bike is that you can put new bits on it as you prefer (to a point of course).  Hard to put the old into the new though. 

[boatdetective]

 Well said, leafman.  I have to say I ride the same line. My 1200S has been great. While it has an ECU and FI- it's pretty basic stuff. I feel like the current range of CARC bikes are plenty modern- but with limits of complexity. The net result is that they can be owned and maintained by mere mortals. From an engineering standpoint i look at some things as a matter of adding features..and then paring them down. While our Guzzis are far from perfect, the concept is that it's one thing to add more and more tech to something- it's another altogether to simplify something to its essentials.  Tigers and T-34s?