Ry_Trapp01647545522

yea, thats the one. a while back i was doing some searching on buells(when i first fell in love with the XBs and decided that i shall eventually have one), and i stumbled upon a buell website that had a survey thread where buell owners described how good a job the harley dealership nearest to them did. a few people commented on the salesmen at a.d. farrow really doing a good job of promoting buells and not just spewing BS to sell them, but the harleys usually got serviced first, even if they came in after the buell(WTF is with that???). i dont really understand that, but that was a few years ago too, hopefully things have changed. have fun with your buells, i'll be dreaming about mine for a little while, lol.

i dont have a bike yet(im broke and looking for a career first, lol), but i plan on eventually getting a buell! the XB12s are HAWT, and, from people ive talked to, they handle like a dream! i did read that the harley shop in columbus(forget the name) doesn't quite offer the same customer service for buell owners as they do the harley owners.

very cool! i just have to nit pick like everyone else though. it weighs too damn much, it needs a stick, it needs to be a LOT shorter(see the new road & track where they have an old an new challenger side by side, the old one looks like a midget compared to the SUV sized new one), it needs more tire in the back, it needs more power(c'mon! the GT500 is 3850-3920lbs and has 500HP, even if it does have horrendous front to rear balance), and i would still love to have one.

sounds like a hell of a trip, lol. when we moved last year(only a town away), we were supposed to have a Uhaul. my dad called them up, scheduled it, all is well in the kingdom. we get there at 8AM to pick it up, and it turns out that the person my dad talked to knew she was about to get fired so she decided to screw the company(and, in turn, us) over. we ended up moving everything with 2 pickup trucks, one being my cousins big white cummins with a 6 inch lift and 37s pulling a 26' trailer. we got most of the stuff on the trailor and everything was going well, then it started raining and i got to sleep on the couch for a few days while my mattress dried out. moving sucks! while my dad was driving a truck last year, i went with him a few times. one of our trips was down to florida. it was 85 in december, and we had just came from a snow storm in minnesota(you really would think they would know how to drive up there, being that they go through terrible winters every year. turns out that common sense doesnt exist in minnesota). tampa is really nice! now miami, that plus just plain sucks! might as well make it a province of cuba. have fun down there! if your gonna be back in columbus changing out knees, you may be working on my dad, lol.

im not big in cameras, but ive heard nothing but good about canons.

so that makes it alright to ignore probable cause, to ignore the fifth amendment, to destroy evidence, to assume guilt rather than innocense, to not allow trial by jury, and to ignore your miranda rights? did you read the article? it doesnt say anything about taking away your "right" to drive, it talks about taking away your legitemate rights, some of which may prove your innocense!

yea, i guess i should have been a little more specific with the 2 glasses, lol. hell, might even put my 130lb ass over .08, LOL. but like the guy mentions in the article, no one is impaired at .08%. like the article says, the AMA first said it was .15% at which you were impaired, then, after some pressure, they said it was .10%. then the lawmakers, under pressure from MADD, dropped it down to .08%.

its not about driving drunk, i dont think anyone here is for protecting drunk drivers, its the fact that you may still get a DUI even if you aren't under the influence. not to mention taking away the basic rights that murderers and rapists get. anyone who gets a legit(I.E., they were actually drunk) DUI deserves every bit of punishment they got, but its pretty rediculous that 2 glasses of wine can get you a DUI when you aren't even under the influence of anything. who was that, benjamin franklin? it's unfortunate how many people this quote applies to.

http://www.duiblog.com/2005/05/09/the-dui-exception-to-the-constitution/ its pretty long, but WELL worth the read. please dont post your opinion if you havn't read it. this is just a bunch of bullshit. i completly agree with this guy! anyone who really is impaired and driving should get jail time, but anyone caught by this bullshit loophole in the justice system is getting royally screwed without lube. and people talk about the 'patriot act' eroding our rights

putting your car in neutral when coasting or going down hill doesn't actually help your mileage. your car will detect that your coasting and doesn't squirt fuel in since it doesnt need to. or something like that. there was a small debate about that on svtperformance.

i think there might be a 4 wheel parts around columbus somewhere, but dont quote me on that.

my brother had one a couple years ago, fun as hell! the speedo read 50 but we tailed it with a car and me on the bike(since i was the lightest around, all 130lbs of me) and it went about 42 or 43mph. would love to had one, but i think i need to get a better car first.

im up for it only if there is a beater class! who wants to race maw mean tracker?! GEO POWAH!!!

i saw a show(cant remember what it was) on the discovery channel maybe a year or 2 ago about how replacing stoplights with 3/4 way stop signs dramatically reduced the number of accidents in those specific intersections. people(such as my self) are more inclined to stomp the gas to make that yellow since they know they will be waiting a little while, and end up in a major collision. with stop signs in place, you just pull up, stop, wait for the person with the right away, then go. no yellows to 'beat', no long waiting periods, just a quick stop and go. the statistics are just amazing, and its rediculous that this isn't being implemented across the nation. im not saying that we should get rid of every stop light(some intersections obviously need them), but we should get rid of them in areas where they aren't needed(pretty much every 2 lane intersection).

FWD? that must be rare. maybe its a one off! own a piece of history!!! LOL

truf! ive read many a story about this!

yea, maybe im reading into this a little too much. oh well, its not like i'll be helmet shopping any time soon, lol. i hope im in a position to get a bike in about 2 years or so. great post, and a good point craig!

buell XB12 http://www.hdpixel.com/gallery/data/3859/xb121.jpg i shall own one some day. hopefully pickup a used one within the next few years.

you may have a point there... naw, i never could stand listening to that "hawthorn heights" emo shit.

vizio/westinghouse = best value sony(as well as a few others) = best quality i really want a 37" or 42" vizio.

oh yes, of course! a helmet at all is better than no helmet, and a snell rated helmet is far safer than a block of concrete around your head, but if(excuse me, WHEN) i get a bike, i plan on getting anything but a snell rated helmet. people say "the amount your willing to spend on a helmet determines the value of your head"(or something to that extent), and, although thats false in the presence of this test, i think it could apply to this(as in, why wouldnt you try to get the safest helmet possible by avoiding snell helmets?). you do bring up a good question though, is the heavier but softer helmet safer or is the lighter but harder helmet safer? they should do a test on that too(if there is such a test), then compile a list of recomendations from the 2 tests. maybe someone needs to print this out and hand it to the SCCA/national trails people to justify the use of a non-snell helmet. i really dont see any faults in this test and i dont understand why they wouldn't change the rules up. who knows, maybe snell payed them off or something, lol.

i did a search and didn't see this posted on here, so if its a repost, my bad. its a long read but well worth it! basically, you dont want snell rated helmets because they are too stiff/hard and will transfer more engergy to your head than a lesser rated(DOT/euro standards/etc.) helmet. this isn't just theory that they came up with, they actually tested it. snell sent a response, but they got straight dominated. its pretty scary to think that such a highly held standard is more lethal than the lesser standards. you may only be able to get that $800 triple fan cooled, air diffusing, mood lighted, auto-tinting, ultra cushiony helmet with a snell rating, but is it worth possible brain damage? http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/gearbox/motorcycle_helmet_review/index.html

oops, guess i missed that(obviously).

and he checked "almost caused" under "crash"??? wow. what a royal dick. was this in the newark/heath/hebron/buckeye lake region? we seem to have a boat load of asshole cops here. if anyone on here is a cop from around here, no offense, but thats from my encounters, my families encounters, and my friends encounters.

i gotta say, i was finding the on-own-property ticket stuff more entertaining than this spelling bee show down or whatever the hell is going on.