the bike shed

[facthunter]

A fully charged Lead acid accumulator (the original name) should show 14.2 volts (no load). for a nominal 12 volt item. . Nev

[spenaroo]

Anything putting power into a battery should have an auto cut off, likewise anything that drains it. Still I'd be replacing it with a sealed gel type.

 

Here's my background, I have a modified version hanging on my wall as a canvas (but doesn't photograph well)

 

These are the bikes I've enjoyed owning.

The Vstrom is still in the garage, as is my Ducati Monster S2R. I absolutely love this bike, suits my style/ability so well. Instantly felt comfortable with it (much to my friends amusement - wide open throttle shortly after throwing my leg over)

[skippydiesel]

A fully charged Lead acid accumulator (the original name) should show 14.2 volts (no load). for a nominal 12 volt item. . Nev

 

I agree that 14.2 is what you should see from a new/good condition battery. I have the odd lawn mower battery that reads less ,something like 13 and still seems to do the job. I would not accept this in my aircraft where I am careful only to use a battery in top condition.

[spacesailor]

I have a Battery of Accumulator,s in a six by two volt configuration,

Single cell Accumulator are what makes a battery.

spacesailor

[Bruce Tuncks]

I ruined a new motorbike battery with a cheap solar charger too. I agree with the advice about a voltage limiter, and this would be cheaper than a new battery.

In my case, the battery was on my Jabiru and I started the engine once with it before leaving it on the solar charger for 3 months while i was away. On coming back, the battery would not even turn the motor over, so I bought an Odyssey and threw out that solar charger.

It's not the solar thats the problem, it is the lack of a voltage cutout that does the damage.

[willedoo]

I stumbled across this photo listed on eBay of a Soviet Air Force dude with his motorcycle. After a bit of googling, I found out it's a IZh-56, made from 1956 to 1962 and forerunner to the IZh Planeta. Single cylinder 2 stroke, 346cc. Looking at photos on the web, it appears to have twin exhaust ports and pipes, and two spark plugs. The style of it reminds me of an old Honda Dream I had when I was a kid. I'd wager the Honda was the more reliable of the two. A lot if those early Soviet bikes were fairly crappy from memory.

 

 

Edited September 4, 2020 by willedoo

[Jerry_Atrick]

Nice looking bike,though...

[Old Koreelah]

4 hours ago, willedoo said:

... A lot if those early Soviet bikes were fairly crappy from memory.

...as were a lot of bikes built in Britain, Italy, Spain...

 

A motor mechanic mate owned a series of high-tech bikes that demanded lots of fastidious and expensive maintenance.

He ended up with a 650 Ural which he loved! Simple, robust, unpretentious and easily repaired.

One aspect I loved was the drive shaft's universal joint: two flat plates connected by a thick conveyor belt pad.

It did the job.

[willedoo]

A mate put me on to this Youtube video when we were talking about Urals. It's a half hour restoration video of one of the older ones.

 

 

[nomadpete]

What's an 'old' one?

 

I recall considering buying a Voshcod 650 back in the 1970's.

Back then it cost $650 for a 650cc copy of a BMW with leading forks front end and brakes that couldn't stop a bicycle.

So I bought a Yamaha 125 that went faster and stopped better, and cornered better (although that was still crappy), for half the price.

 

Are you telling me that people collect these things now?

[willedoo]

9 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

What's an 'old' one?

1960's in this case. The one in the video is a Russian restoration. I don't remember if they brought Urals out here then, but I do remember seeing the Voshkods. The newish and current model Urals have a big following around the world and quite a few here. One of their big selling points is that they are the only manufacturer to sell sidecar outfits factory made and designed. Plus the two wheel drive which we can't get here being a  right hand drive country.

 

https://www.imz-ural.com.au/

Edited December 27, 2020 by willedoo

[willedoo]

An edit to the above post. Just checked into the Ural website and as of 2020 they now have an on demand 2WD model in Australia.

[onetrack]

Ahhh! Ural! Wid da sidecar, too!! Iz good! Iz built like Russian tractor, Strong!! But iz no longer cheap!! 

[willedoo]

2 hours ago, onetrack said:

But iz no longer cheap!! 

Not wrong. At $30,000 for the 2WD model, a few thousand overpriced IMO.

[old man emu]

14 hours ago, nomadpete said:

What's an 'old' one?

Unfortunately, it's we who are are forgetting the passing of then years. I started to realise the passing of time when I first saw a VB Commodore with Historic Car Club plates.

 

The Definition of an Historic vehicle used by the Council of Heritage Motor Clubs NSW is 

 

A HERITAGE VEHICLE IS ANY SELF-PROPELLED VEHICLE WITH TWO OR MORE WHEELS THAT WHEN MANUFACTURED WAS INTENDED TO CARRY PEOPLE AND/OR MOVE GOODS OR EQUIPMENT, AND IS AT LEAST 30 YEARS OLD FROM THE CURRENT YEAR. 

 

They have defined the following eras of manufacture:

EDWARDIAN - Built before 1905

VETERAN - 1905 to end 1918

VINTAGE - 1919 to end 1930

POST-VINTAGE - 1930 to end 1949

 

After Post-Vintage the eras are simply named for the decade: 1950, 1960, etc.

[nomadpete]

I still haven't come to terms with seeing historic number plates on cars that I used to drive back when they were new. It just doesn't seem right.

 

Also, I have trouble coping with people salivating over restored old 'classics' that I clearly recall being dogs when they were new (and haven't miraculously become glorious luxury vehicles with the passage of time)

[nomadpete]

But thanks anyway OME for clarifying the 'strict liability' official definitions.

 

You're really just rubbing in how old I am. At least I'm only 'post vintage'. I'll point that fact out to my offspring next time I see them.

[facthunter]

There's one reason to have them You can fix them when they stop, and you can check the oil level and grease it yourself. There's better parts availability for some of these than for a 5 year old Honda.. Cars with exotic alloys and a lot of plastic can  be an  issue whether ancient or modern. Very little damage writes off a modern vehicle.. They just are not designed to be repaired.. They have  you by the balls, so to speak. 

 Mind you, they go, stop and handle very well and have lots of  safety features, pollute less and are much more economical and are cheaper in real money terms. Nev

[onetrack]

I often wonder how we survived, driving the old cars at breakneck speeds over roads that were largely goat tracks (even when they were sealed, they would still be classed as goat tracks, today!)

Bitumen seal that was often far from smooth, tight curves (many of which were not engineered curves, and suffered from a varying radius), narrow seal widths, crossply tyres that pulled you from one ridge to another, bloody awful drum brakes (particularly on GM and GMH products), vacuum wipers that nearly stopped when you needed them most (overtaking), 6V electrics that were a joke - and even a lot of 12V lights were poor.

 

Yet we still sat on 80mph a lot of the time because we had major distances to cover. Even the grey-motor Holdens would do 85mph on fairly level country. The red motors were a joy, particularly the 179 and 186.

The newspaper delivery mob in W.A., Bays, were famed for being spotted doing over 90mph in their high-speed V8 powered Ford F100 panel vans, on country roads in the wee small hours, delivering heavy loads of the West Australian newspaper.

 

We relied on two things to help us greatly in that era - Michelin X tyres, and PBR VH44 brake boosters. They were both godsends for high speed driving in the 60's.

One of the greatest advantages of the era was light traffic, virtually no cops, and no open road speed limits. But if you were careless, or liked driving boozed, there was always a big roadside tree waiting to take you out.

Edited December 28, 2020 by onetrack

[old man emu]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

Very little damage writes off a modern vehicle..

The reason for this is not a Big Business con. It is as result of increased knowledge into the forces applied to the human body during a collision. Although I do agree that damage caused in low speed (less than 20 kph) collisions is expensive to repair mainly due to the cost of replacement panels and labour costs.

 

But getting back to the safety aspect. In any collision, there is a change in the Energy of the objects involved.  Consider putting a nail into a piece of soft balsa. If you use a hammer, the hammer has a high initial Kinetic Energy due to its mass and velocity. If you quickly swing the hammer down onto the head of the nail, the nail will go into the wood very quickly. The reduction in Kinetic Energy is large. On the opposite side, if you rested the hammer on the head of the nail and pushed with your hand, the Kinetic Energy of the hammer would be less

 

Modern vehicle design has passenger safety as a high priority. As well as active safety devices such as lights, horns and seatbelts, cars are designed with passive safety.  This means using the energy the objects have because they are in motion (Kinetic Energy) into mechanical energy to deform the vehicle before a lot of it is transferred to the people inside. So, modern cars are "softer" than pre-1970s cars, and as a result offer greater passenger protection and the cost of preservation of the inanimate object.

 

[Old Koreelah]

56 minutes ago, onetrack said:

I often wonder how we survived, driving the old cars at breakneck speeds over roads that were largely goat tracks...

Very true, 1T. One aspect you missed is kangaroos jumping in front of you. In my bulletproof youth I rarely saw Roos and only ever hit one. These days I avoid driving at night even in my 4WD; I’d be mad to ride at night!

At Xmas I met a relative who hit a black cow on his bike and 18 months later still looks half dead.

That could have been me, yanks ago, when I had close shaves with black cattle and horses at night. Black cows should be banned, or forced to wear reflective paint.

 

Another point: my headlight used to pick up the eye of a rabbit, roo or beast long before I saw them; it’s years since I saw an eye reflection. Has Darwinian rules left us with animals that look away from approaching lights?

[Old Koreelah]

15 minutes ago, old man emu said:

...Modern vehicle design has passenger safety as a high priority. As well as active safety devices such as lights, horns and seatbelts, cars are designed with passive safety.  This means using the energy the objects have because they are in motion (Kinetic Energy) into mechanical energy to deform the vehicle before a lot of it is transferred to the people inside. So, modern cars are "softer" than pre-1970s cars, and as a result offer greater passenger protection and the cost of preservation of the inanimate object.

 

 

Spot On, OME.

 

Attending hundreds of road accidents as a VRA rescuer has made me quite happy about the trend towards throw-away cars. The solid old models were far more likely to kill you!

Over forty years our fatalities have declined enormously, while cars are traveling faster and there are far more of them on the roads. I doubt drivers are getting any better, but I know the cars are getting safer.

[onetrack]

Modern cars are built from thinner sections of high-tensile steel, that are designed to crumple under calculated impact loads. The old cars were built from thick sections of mild steel that didn't bend a great deal, even after a solid impact.

What is more important, is that the panels made of mild steel can be hammered out or pulled back into line with porta-powers and chassis-straighteners - without serious levels of fracturing. A bit of heat helped.

 

But the HT panels and structural sections of current cars are not designed to be straightened, and will fracture or tear, if it's attempted, due to the HT steel qualities.

 

Furthermore, because the structural sections are designed and fabricated in specific shapes to provide a pathway for structural compression - these shapes cannot be successfully re-shaped to their prior shape after impact.

 

To that end, the manufacturers and road registration authorities have got together and produced the booklet called "Damage Assessment Criteria for the Classification of Statutory Write-offs".

 

The book is very clear on what can be repaired, and what can't, and often it doesn't take much to classify a vehicle as a Statutory Write-off. Just one tear in the firewall panel is regarded as a reason for a SWO.

 

https://www.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/8922/MR1466.pdf

 

 

[spacesailor]

Makes sense to NEVER buy a new modern car.

My favorite  is 1989, hopefully made of Real steel !.

spacesailor

[facthunter]

ALL steel is real The high tensile is strong (and lighter for it's weight). Today  with labour costs where they are you would spend a fortune  straightening  a Chev or a Packard and the chassis AND body have to be done. . People DIED in those vehicles but if you are serious you are still unsafe in most medium sized trucks and larger SUVs 'Anything with OFF road tyres that's been lifted up. You best bet is still to not prang at high speed. or have a fast side impact. MODERN smaller cars are terrific in a prang compared to anything in the 50's and they handle well. It's the human that fails the safe test. Inattention and some are just MENTAL. There's no other way to describe it. Ride a Motorcycle and find out.. Nev