I can only quoit one of the response to the article which I happen to agree with.




Norm Spafard

June 20, 2012



"Having been around the block a time or two the only part of Eric’s article that has any substance is the first paragraph, which like a few other subjects will only bring out the worst and for unfortunate reasons. Not currently a DS’r there are a few points I take issue with on a diatribe such as this.

First it is difficult to embrace such an article when it is presented so lopsidedly, opinion will never stand up to something well researched. Research in this situation requires something more than a few emails and talks with industry insiders. On example being the presentation of potential insurance issues, I made a quick call to my agent, who is with one of the nations top 3 insurance providers and he understood the issue and stated there was no weight to the potential of not being covered. Research is work and generally requires more than calls and emails. I doubt Rider does nothing less when performing road test and comparisons of equipment.

Secondly, much ado is pushed on performance, exactly what are we talking about here? Aren’t the majority of motorcycle (and cars for that matter) engineered way beyond the max performance the average or even above average rider can use? Even if the average rider had the skills to maximize a bikes performance, where could they do so, not on any of the roads you and I use day in and day out. It seems fairly simple to deduce that even a car tire can handle any performance the general motorcycle population places on the average bike

Thirdly, there was discussion regarding “handling differences”. So what does THAT mean; allow your tires to drop in pressure=handling difference; new tires vs old tires=handling difference; ape-hangers= handling difference, hard tail vs soft tail= handling difference, shoot cruisers vs sport vs touring vs standards = handling differences. You pays your money and you takes your chances.

In conclusion, Eric wraps up saying he had done ‘due diligence’, personally I believe that from the responses here we can see that is far from the truth. Honestly the only thing accomplished here was mouthing the words of marketing insiders, we live in a world consumed with litigation, I doubt you can find one manufacturer of anything that would endorse the use of their particular product for something other than what it was made for. They can’t, it would open up a court room door. The by line of the article uses the word nonconformity, maybe it is about time to look at that word as something to embrace rather than ridicule, if my memory serves that was one of the principles that made this country great. Shoot to most of the driving public motorcycle riders are nonconformists to the max, DS’ing is not for everyone, so be it but lets not throw the baby out with the bath water simply because we heard it was the thing to do. Eric is a better writer than this and I believe that Rider is a better magazine than this, next time either go the full monty and truly do due diligence or allow sleeping dog to lye."