redkow97

not on a wet track...

I'd be in on this too, Brandon. I wear a medium, if you've got one. I'll toss you $10 for the shirt, and make up the balance by pimping the shop edit - almost forgot. I will be there Saturday only Possibly Friday for practice, if my wife will let me. Sunday is her birthday, so... well, I'm choosing my battles with the pregnant lady.

whoever said 200% more is doing their math differently than me. I am working under the assumption that "100% more" would be double the horsepower, because you're taking 100% of what the SV has, and then adding 100% more to that. I gave the R1 like 130hp to be conservative, and the SV 72hp to be generous. 72 x 1.8 (180%) = 130. 180%-100% = 80% more. ...but anyway How much faster than 135 do you want to go? You're saying that cruising at 6k rpm doesn't feel right, but that's roughly halfway up the SV's tach. Sounds about right to me. I agree that the SV would be virtually perfect if you could up it to 85-90hp at the wheel, but 70 at the wheel is still very adequate. You want more torque, gear it up. You want more top-speed, you can try gearing it up...

People registering in Advanced who overestimate their skill level? But that NEVER happens? ...but I think you're probably getting to be quite a bit quicker than you give yourself credit for, Nathan. I assume you're getting to the track pretty consistently these days, and that alone is a HUGE benefit. You're not just passing a lot of people, but you're making it look pretty effortless. THAT's a sign of superior riding.

Two quick observations with no dog in this fight: 1) I can't believe no one called the OP out on his claim that an R1 has "40% more power" than an SV. It's more like 80% more, and that is if your SV is tuned to perfection, and the R1 is kind if a dog. 2) "outgrow" is surely a poor choice of words, but if the OP wants more horsepower for street use, an R1 may or may not be the best way to get it. I think he really wants more torque. Nothing wrong with that, and even the best rider in the world can't magically increase an SV's torque curve.

to more directly answer the OP's question, I can't say that I would listen live, but I would listen to replays or podcasts of archived shows if the topic interested me. The biggest issue I foresee is trying to find a large enough audience, without boring 3/4 of it when you're talking about one style versus the other. I've really never ridden a motorcycle in the dirt (unless chasing my dogs around the back yard in 1st gear on the XR100 counts...). It's not that dirt riding doesn't interest me, but it's not what I'm MOST interested in. That's not to say i wouldn't still listen, but some people really stick to what they know, and think everything else sucks. I think you'd have to plan to cover the following topics EVERY week: - cruising events, charity rides, bike shows, bike nights - Drag racing (results, and maybe some tech topic. Tips, or introductions to how to get started. What kind of times different cruiser riders and sportbike riders should expect to run. How much gear is required at various venues. Maybe weekly updates on which tracks cost how much per pass?) - dirt racing (Supercross and arenacross for sure. I don't follow dirt enough to really know which series is/are the largest) - road racing. I like to hear AMA results, because I can actually get to those events, meet those riders, etc. Focusing on the smaller teams also appeals to me, because those guys are more like me. Kaleb DeKeyrel made his AMA debut last round. I rode with him at a trackday a few years ago. That's cool to me. WSBK and Moto-GP would be mildly less interesting, unless there was a major upset or crazy story like Lorenzo racing a day after breaking his collar bone. - touring tips? - a bike review of some type? (doesn't have to be a new bike. Best used bike values are great pieces of information IMHO)

Is one of them Larry? I have listened to a couple of the "two-wheeled power hour" broadcasts, because Larry is racing OMRL this year, and featured the 10 yr old who keeps kicking my ass in Formula 4... Larry's pretty knowledgeable. I would say he speaks with an "authoritative" tone. I'd hesitate to agree with "know-it-all," but if you've never met him, I could see how he'd come off that way. I've disagreed with Larry in face-to-face conversations, and in that setting, he's always at least given me a viable explanation for why his opinion differs from mine. You don't get that from the one-way communication of the radio show. Ultimately, he is a guy who knows quite a bit, but also admits there is a bunch he could stand to learn. And you wont' find anyone more excited about promoting our sport, so I'm inclined to forgive most faults For a guy his age and size, he gets around the track pretty well. I wouldn't call him "fast," but anyone pointing and laughing during the riders' meeting would be eating some crow when they saw him actually ride. He'd be in the top half of most intermediate groups. Super nice guy too.

I know the parallel twin vibrates a lot, but you're a cheap date...

I don't suppose this beast gets very good mileage...

Mmmmm "screamer" motor R1... A friend of mine has an '05. Great engine. No cross-plane crank wizardry, but who needs it?

Pics? Location? I am intrigued...

Shaun has my EX500 for sale in the classifieds currently. If I bought it back though, i would put the fairings in my basement and make it look like a naked SV, and keep the stock stuff around in case I ever needed to sell it.

That's why I think the dog would have gone at the officers restraining the owner, rather than the third guy... But I wouldn't say my Rottweiler is any more protective than our Beagle. Of the house, maybe. Of me in particular? Nah... Kramer doesn't like people at the door, or on the other side of the fence, but once we let them in, he's fine with people. Even if they're picking on me. One of the best things you can do for any dog is show them that THEY are not in control of who enters the house. Don't let dogs be the first to greet guests. Someone needs to hold the dog back, and show them that the outsiders are there to see YOU (or your family member), and that no amount of barking is going to change that. After enough guests are not dissuaded by the dog's behavior, they get the picture.

Calm down Steve - I didn't call you an asshole, I just disagreed with your assessment of the situation. In one breath you're saying "all Rottweilers _______," and in the next you're saying, "I know not every Rottweiler fits the stereotype..." I'm just saying that you can never assume that any dog will act a certain way just because of what breed it is, or you think it is. And while I accept that certain breeds were historically bred for certain purposes, I think that the century or more of de-conditioning from those purposes makes them a product of their environment more than a product of their genealogy. We're all arm-chair quarterbacking this scenario. I don't think I would have shot the dog if I were in the cop's shoes, but then again, if I'm already holding a pistol, maybe I would. As much as it sucks for the officer, I don't think the mere threat of being bitten is enough to justify deadly force. In my mind, it would justify pepper spray or a taser, but use of a service weapon should be reserved for after the dog has actually bitten him and not let go. I'm sure that will be a highly unpopular stance with some people, but the fact is that in the current situation, we're all left to speculate as to whether or not the officer's actions were really necessary. I think it's safe to say that if he had been bitten, he would not have died, nor would he have suffered permanent injury. The dog is dead. It doesn't get much more permanent than that. And yes, the owner is ultimately to blame for putting or allowing his dog into a volatile situation. It is not my dogs' jobs to protect me. It is my job to protect them. Even if it's from their own good intentions.

I'll be in Columbus Friday afternoon into Saturday morning for a concert. Let me know if you want me to ride it down for you ;-)

I know Bill "FOG" Martovich :-) At least I know who he is and have conversed with him on ex-500.com for the last 7 years or so. I had Fogbones installed before I sold it to you, but I didn't consider it a "selling point" and sold them off to someone else before you contacted me. I didn't know he made rearset relocation plates. Most of what Bill innovated had to conform to the rules of the stock 500 class at Loudon Raceway. I wasn't aware that relocating the rearsets was within the rules. I know he never ran true clip-ons, because the rules said that you had to use the stock factory mounting point. The Woodcraft "clip-ons" for the EX500 are designed to conform to that rule, because I'm pretty sure Eric Wood was racing the same series. They're just lowered versions of the stock setup, with replaceable bars, like you'd see on a traditional clip-on setup. My price range is compromised by the fact that my wife and I are expecting a baby in January, so definitely don't hold onto it for my sake. Our first date did involve me picking her up on the bike though, so maybe she'll get nostalgic and let me spend some money :-P Regardless, she got a kick out of seeing pics of the bike, and it's nice to know that it's been taken care of and ridden.

An to clarify, the analysis above is not meant to be an evaluation of whether or not the officer was justified (I should have phrased my post more carefully), but it IS a Bali analysis of whether his "self defense" justification holds water. There may very well be some police policy that has nothing to do with self defense thy exonerates him.

I still say the ultimate issue is whether or not DEADLY force was justified. In order to invoke the affirmative defense of self defense, the officer cannot respond with greater force than that used against him. "Fatal dog attacks in the United States are a small percentage of the relatively common occurrences of dog bites. while at least 4.5 – 4.7 million Americans (2%) are bitten by dogs every year, only about 0.0002% of these (less than 0.00001% of the U.S. population) result in death." So for this officer's defense to be valid, he has to prove that this dog bite would have been 1 of the 9 dog bite fatalities this year. And as I mentioned in an earlier post, the overwhelming majority of those fatalities are young children, not 200 lbs. adult men.

So you know how every Rottweiler in the world was bred? You're still stereotyping based on century old breeding practices and purposes. My dog is at least 10 generations removed from being bred for any particular purpose, be it herding, guarding, or anything else. Every dog has a propensity to be loyal and protective of his owner. People have the same reaction when they perceive a loved one in danger. The breed of dog has virtually nothing to do with its temperament. I would agree that the breed of dog contributes to its potential to do harm, but statistically speaking, all the "guard" breed you described account for very few bites. Statistically, dachshunds are the most likely breed to bite.

"lots" more power? The highest i've seen the 848 list is around 135, and that's at the crank... I would assume Yamaha can get more horsepower out of this engine pretty easily, but they're tuning it for torque.

$8k MSRP? man, I might actually finance a bike... This is what the FZ8 should have been. Sleeving down an R1 motor doesn't cut the weight or width the way this does. I don't know why they can't just put a goddamn circular headlight on bikes these days, but other than that, I like it. A lot.

That's like saying "black people are known to be criminals." You can't stereotype a breed of dog any more than you can stereotype a race of humans. Your follow-up story about the "sweet" pit-bulls illustrates teh flaw in your logic. In the interest of full disclosure, my Rottweiler is hiding under my bed right now, because the neighbors are lighting fireworks ...but the attorney side of me is pretty objective about this kind of shit. If I'm representing the police officer: - the man was obstructing justice by distracting officers from their duties. He was told to stay back (with all the other people filming across the street) and did not listen. He walked up along the back of the police cars, clearly closer than he was instructed to be. He wasn't arrested for filming. Numerous other people who were filming were not arrested. He was arrested for forcing the police to worry about him, rather than keep their attention on the original call. - The dog lunged at the officer, and without the ability to speak to the dog, it was reasonable for the officer to assume the dog was attacking him with deadly force. Therefore, deadly force was an appropriate response. - Furthermore, the man knew he was going to be taken into custody temporarily, if not arrested. He had the opportunity to secure his dog, and failed to do so. Had he put the dog in the car with the windows closed, or leashed him to a lamppost, fire hydrant, etc., a humane officer would have been dispatched to pick up the dog and hold it until the owner was released. The owner's failure to control the dog was the ultimate issue. If I'm representing the dog owner: - He never advanced beyond the perimeter of the police cars, and was merely taking video in a public setting where the police have no expectation of privacy. - He cooperated with officers, voluntarily putting his hands behind his back as he approached them, and surrendered. He also secured his dog in the car prior to the officers approaching, as he wanted to REMOVE the dog from the situation. - While he could/should have rolled up the windows of the vehicle, doing so puts the dog at risk of heat stroke, and it also makes it look as though the man is attempting to flee. (i'm assuming power windows are standard on a nissan versa, but they are among the cheapest cars made, so that may be a stretch...) - After the dog exited the vehicle, it never acted aggressively toward the officers. In fact, the dog meanders about for a few seconds before even approaching the officers. Had the dog wanted to 'attack' anyone in defense of its owner, it would not have waited. - when the dog "lunged" at the officer, it was merely acting in a playful manner, and not an aggressive manner. - Given that the suspect was being arrested for obstruction, and not a violent offense, it would have been totally reasonable for officers to release him (either one hand, or even let him go with the cuffs still secure) to attempt to gain control of the dog. - Shooting the dog cannot be "self defense" as the officer claims, because self defense is not an available defense for the aggressor. Any person who responds with greater force than than threatened or used against them becomes the aggressor, regardless of prior actions. In this case, the dog MAY have bitten the officer. A dog bite (even from a large rottweiler) is not "lethal force." And if they police are going to say that any rottweiler lunge or bite IS lethal force, where is the line drawn? How big or strong or scary looking does a dog have to be for its bite to automatically be considered lethal force? There are hundreds, if not thousands of dog bites each year in the united states, and virtually no fatalities from dog bites. Those fatalities that are recorded are generally infants or very young children left unattended with dogs that out-weigh them. Clearly even a 130 lbs. Rottweiler (which would be pretty big for the breed) is not immediately lethal to a 200+ lbs. police officer. - The police officer has pepper spray and a taser. Either are equally as effective lesser degrees of force that would have been more appropriate. - Furthermore, both of the options above would have been safer to the public. There were numerous bystanders filming and watching the scene. Additionally, the scene itself could have been compromised by the officer's actions of firing a gun - the original suspect, or the officer responding could easily have misconstrued the shots fired at the dog to be shots fired at them. So again, pepper spray or a taser would have been more appropriate options. My personal take, with all of the above considered? The owner is a fucking moron, who was asking to be arrested. As noted, others were keeping a respectful distance, and were not harassed for filming. He had to get closer, and yell at the police. The owner also should have secured his dog in the car. But I question what he thought was going to happen. I'd almost rather have my dog shot than have it die of heat stroke in my car... Dumbass wasn't thinking things through. The officer overreacted to the dog. That's from what I saw on the video. I can't hear growling, or see if the fur on the back of his neck was standing up. But what I can see is that the dog did not immediately charge anyone, nor did he go for the officers taking the owner away. Both of those things lead me to believe that the dog was not "attacking in defense of his owner." If our neighbor is outside when I let my dogs out, they don't fuck around and take a piss - they charge over to the fence and bark. This dog didn't do that. He acted pretty calmly, then turned and jumped up a little. If he'd wanted to bite the officer, I don't think he would have failed. But really, I think the bigger issue is discharging a firearm when other options were available, and viable.

Cops have a hard job regardless of how smart they are or how much training they have, and they're supposed to be street-ready after 6 months at the academy. That's the first problem. We expect near perfection from them, which isn't fair to begin with, but also consider: - up until pretty recently, it was rare for a patrol officer to have a 4-year degree. That's a LARGE portion of active-duty officers who have a high school education. - police officers are often making split-second decisions that we have the benefit of examining in our own sweet time. - the paycheck doesn't attract the absolute best and brightest, unless they're particularly motivated by some other factor. - officers need to be the right balance of brave, and calm. The ideal temperament for a police officer is pretty rare to encounter, so by definition, you're getting a lot of less-than-ideal candidates, no matter how well they score on the civil servants test, or in the police academy. You need people who are very competent, but also willing to have someone spit in their face, and not take it personally.

Shaun - what's the deal with the "fog rearsets?" I see in the last picture that there appears to be a bracket that relocates the rearset. Is that what you're talking about? I assume that moves them up and back an inch or so?

To round out the history a bit: - The bike was set down on its left side in my garage when my wife was moving it. The only damage was a broken clutch lever, which I replaced. I was actually completely amazed that nothing else was scratched or dented. - the owner prior to me laid the bike down on its right side, apparently in a similar fashion to my wife's incident, because there are some light scratches on the water pump (no indication that it ever slid), and the brake lever was bent when I bought it. That was also replaced while I owned the bike. There are heavier fork springs installed. I used the racetech fork spring rate calculator, and installed what they recommended for racing for my weight. I believe that was .90 or .95, but I can't remember. I was ~185 at the time I did the calculations, and it was mildly harsh for me on the street. Would be good for track for someone of similar size, or great for street if you're 200+. And it's not like you can't take out some preload by trimming the spacers that are installed. If memory serves, the lower fairings have scuffs from dragging while cornering. It was always a strong runner for me. I'd consider buying it back, but it's still too nice for my current budget!