Originally written by Uncle Ernie on 2/9/2007 3:40 PM
In a word; Wow!
Wouldn't that rig be wanting some ballast? That rig looks like it would weigh only 100lbs or so...
I don't know a thing about MX and off-road rigs.
======================================================================
One special and very popular option /accessory with these type rigs is an active passenger. You'd have to ask Jay about pricing on this option of course.
Originally written by Uncle Ernie on 2/9/2007 12:40 PM
In a word; Wow!
Wouldn't that rig be wanting some ballast? That rig looks like it would weigh only 100lbs or so...
I don't know a thing about MX and off-road rigs.
I haven't ridden Aaron's rig, but in general you don't want to weigh these type of sidecars down with ballast. That is just dead weight you are going to use up your horsepower moving and your brakes stopping.
What you want is an active passenger working with the driver, both shifting their weight to where it will do the most good at the moment. Your passenger IS your ballast.
Granted, Aaron should have power to spare with that thing, and may run some ballast particularly when without a passenger.
Check out these videos to see it being done:
http://www.imz-ural.com/downloads/movies/European_MotocrossW.wmv
For a closer look watch this(these guys are my heroes!)
http://www.hogwildracing.com/videos.shtml
My KLR rigs are very light. I use ballast for some of the class exercises, but not for everyday riding.
I typically carry about 24# of tools and survival gear in a bugout bag strapped to the deck, with or with out a passenger, but no additional ballast. With this type of rig you had better know how to shift your weight and how to control it when the wheel comes up.
http://adventuresidecar.com/KLRrides/KLR%20sidecar%20ride.htm
Vernon wrote:
>>For a closer look watch this(these guys are my heroes!)
http://www.hogwildracing.com/videos.shtml<<
I fyou look close at some of th epictures of Scott Whitney's V Rod that they did the DaKar attempt with there is what looks like a little black dot on the front of the sidecar down low near the bike...It is a round SCT sticker...lol. I still get a kick out of it. Great guys
i run an older 81 honda cb 900c with the hi lo gearbox
tons o power and dirt cheap
patrick l
That diamond plate box that the seatpad is on will hold ballast.
Lonnie
Preacher,
A lot has been said since your original post but I will jump in here with my $0.02 worth. I love my Ural but, last year, I began thinking of a more powerful rig for touring and exploring. (I love cruising back/dirt roads to see where they go.) I had thought of a dual sport like a BMW R100 GS, Guzzi Quota or Triumph Tiger. Being a Beemerphile, the GS was the most likely candidate. Claude Stanley, to be frank, talked me out of going the dual sport route because I really didn't need the "off road capability". What I needed was "back road capability" combined with the power to face the semi's on the freeway when needed. OK, a BMW R100 airhead. Then I learned a similar-age BMW K100 provided 25% more horsepower than the R100 for the same displacement. Both are 1980's bikes and equally affordable but, in the world of sidecars, horsepower is King and torque Queen. I bowed to the Gods of power and the K-bike was it.
As we speak, my new K100-based sidecar rig Claude is building nears completion. Power to handle the super-slab without batting an eye. Handling enhancements to face Deal's Gap without shame. (We have nicknamed the setup "HPS Lite".) But, still, with the fortitude to face Township Road 123 from Nowhere to Beyond Nowhere.
Go for the power but know it can be had affordably if you look.
And, second, understand that dual-sport sidecar rigs are great but they do have their quirks. If you don't really need true offroad capability, consider the alternatives.
Can I get off my soapbox now?
IS IT APRIL YET?
Sarge
With what Sarge wrote I felt some futher explaination was possibly in order. Motorcycles, sidecars and so many things have become specialized in todays world. More focused on specific usage than a few years back. It really wasn't that long ago that we had bikes that were , to a point, 'do all with limitations' machines. These days we don't see this as we had a few years ago in the same way. Is this a bad thing? Not at all if we relaize there are still other options for us if we recognize them.
As has been stated so many times here and elsewhere everything is a compromise. When we create a rig we must decide how much of a compromise we are willing to live with based on the usage of the rig.
With a sidecar rig we have options sure. It is up to us to decide what we want to do with these when designing and building an outfit. Where do we plan to ride the rig and on what type of terrain? What type of terrain will be the 'norm' for us and what type of terrain will be ridden only a little bit? Questions like these deserve answers that only we , the owners or builders, can answer.
We need to answer these questions truthfully when making our decisions. Leaning fully to the off road world will be an advantage to us if that is the world we plan to live in. A lighter bike with a platform type sidecar,some storage capabilities, high ground clearance, agressive tires and so forth may be the answer there but the compromise to riding enjoyment from a practical day to day standpoint on the hardroad may not be satisfactory to us.
By the same token a heavier rig with maybe a large cargo box would not be happy in the 'roads are for sissys' world.
We need to ask ourselves where we will be riding on a regular basis and what will make for a good compromise for us in those areas.
Road warrior rigs and trail warrior rigs are not one and the same if we want to focus our designs based on being practical.
Aesthetics are a huge factor to many today and cannot be ignored. Some are more than willing to let aesthetics reign over practicality. So be it if that is your decision. The looks =vs= function battle is a real one. Deciding what the function of a rig shoudl be and then making a decision on how much we want to compromose that for a personal build is a big decision that only the owner shoudl make. For the owner To do this of course that owner needs to be presented with some basic ideas of what to expect. These forums are a good place to hear some of those ideas.
No, I did not talk Sarge out of anything or into anything really. We just discussed some ideas of what he wanted to use it for and feel the rig he is getting now will be a good one for him with the least amount of compromises for the intended use. In a nut shell it consists a K 100 with a large aluminum cargo box with a twin lid system on a custom made sidecar sidecar frame suspensded by a torsion bar.It has a manual tilt adjustment on it, a swaybar, car tires all around and a leading link front end. The leading link will be a EML unit during 'phase I' and will be swapped out for a single sided swingarm leading link at a later date. All three wheels will be directly intechagable at that point. The rig also has a car battery conversion as well as a reverse on it. Will it do well on the dirt roads that Sarge likes to explore? Sure. And it will also do very well on the paved backroads and even the superslabs when called to travel them. Would it do well in the hardcore off road arena? The answer is NO. Is that 'NO' a bad thing? Not at all 🙂
Hey sarge before you pick this thing up maybe a 'road test' to alaska or the labrador highway may be a good idea? Call me 🙂
The good thing about the trend towards more specialized bikes and rigs is the need/reason to own more fo them to cover each type of riding you do.
Originally written by tkpinsc on 2/11/2007 9:06 AM
The good thing about the trend towards more specialized bikes and rigs is the need/reason to own more fo them to cover each type of riding you do.
Yes, even though the words 'need/reason' may be translated
to 'excuse' by some family member.
No matter if it works out right ? 🙂
