When is a Motorcycle Really a Car?

My half-assed attempt here at a blog is about motorcycles.  I like motorcycles and I like writing about them.  I also like other stuff, too.  I like cars, for example.  So how can I write about a car on a motorcycle site?

I know, I can write about the Morgan Three Wheeler!  It's classified as a motorcycle here in the U.S.  Hello, loop hole.

The Three Wheeler is a modern nod to the three-wheeled cars of Morgan's past, including the fast versions called the Super Sports.  Like all Morgans, they used wood for parts of the chassis and as the name suggests, had three wheels.  Two wheels were in the front and one was in the back.  Keen observers and those studying for the GMAT will notice that two front wheels plus one back wheel equals three wheels total.

What made the Morgan Super Sports different was not only that it used three wheels, but that it was also powered by a motorcycle engine.  The engine was usually a V-twin from Matchless or JAP.  Now, since I'm talking about a car, you're expecting the engine to be under a hood (or a bonnet, depending on where you're from) and you'd be wrong.

You see, Morgan mounted the engine outside of the body.  Most motorcycle engines of the time were air-cooled, so mounting them in the breeze made perfect sense.  Strangely, some Super Sports used liquid-cooled motorcycle engines, so placing them in the breeze ahead of the radiator made less sense.  Eventually, the use of motorcycle engines was abandoned and Morgan used a four-cylinder engine mounted inside the body.  The three wheels were also soon joined by a fourth wheel and an era came to a close.

Morgan, being a backward-thinking company that still uses wood construction in its 170 mph supercars, decided last year to bring the three wheeler back.  The new version is called the Morgan Three Wheeler.

True to form, the tub-like body is there, the front wheels are spoked like the originals and there's an air-cooled motorcycle engine out in the breeze.  There are two small screen that act as wind deflectors and two roll hoops behind the seats are for safety...maybe.

Sadly, Matchless and JAP went bust like most of the British motorcycle companies, so the new Three Wheeler is powered by a 1990cc, pushrod S & S V-twin.  All 80 of those American horses are funneled to the lone rear wheel through a five-speed manual sourced from the Mazda Miata.

The entire car, er, motorcycle is completely bespoke, so you can choose the color, seat leather and from a whole slew of graphics.  Among the graphics are semi-naked ladies, RAF roundels and the 112th Squadron shark mouth.  And, yes, part of the chassis is made from wood.  Hey, it's light and strong.  So what if it's not as sexy as carbon fiber?

All of this elemental motoring is not cheap, however.  In the U.S., a Three Wheeler will cost about $40,000.

I don't really care that it's expensive, has an American V-twin and uses wood in the chassis.  It looks like a total blast to drive and I really want one.  I like that it's completely ridiculous and it knows it.  The Three Wheeler does not take itself seriously at all and I find that endearing in so many ways.  I'd get one with RAF Roundels, the shark mouth and some stick-on bullet holes.

$40,000 will buy you this or an Acura TL.  I think that's an easy decision.

Cheap Mods

Modifying your motorcycle is a fun, worthwhile experience.  Not only do you get the benefits of improvement, but you get to know your bike and how it works on a much more intimate level.  However, there are downsides to modifying.

One, the mods don't always improve your bike.  Welding on a hardtail is a mod but does it really improve your bike?  No, it doesn't.

Two, modifying can get expensive.  Oh, sure, the parts are cheap (sometimes) but who's going to put them on if you can't?  The costs can quickly escalate.

Don't get put-ff, though, because there are ways to mod your machine on the cheap.

Back when I bought new exhausts for my Triumph Bonneville, I removed the snorkel from the airbox.  It was a cheap, simple and quick way to get more air into the box.  Wanting more, I removed the restrictor from the airbox. 

The previous two mods cost me nothing.  I even had extra silicone sealer laying around that I used to reseal the box when I removed the restrictor.  Those two mods worked well.  With the airbox and exhaust changes, the bike felt like it wanted to rev more and wasn't so choked up.  I imagine a few horses were added, too, but it's hard to tell without a dyno.

Still wanting more without spending more, I decided today to open up the inlet to the air filter. 

It was a simple job that took maybe five minutes total.  A few months ago, I purchased a used airbox off EBay and hacked the inlet from that one up in case I messed up or didn't like the results.  You see?  That's called thinking ahead.

Anyway, I cut away the bit that wasn't holding the air filter in place and ended up with this:



The old inlet is on the left and the new modified inlet is on the right.  As you can see, there's quite a difference.  Total removal of the old inlet and installation of the new inlet took about three seconds. 


With the job done, it was time to see if I wasted a whole 303 seconds of my life.

I rode around a bit to get the bike warmed up and then headed to a nearby stop sign that leads to a long bit of straight road.  I gave it as much as I dared off the line and the result was amazing.

Maybe I was wishful thinking but the bike felt much more aggressive on acceleration, especially as it got closer to the redline.  It felt a bit sluggish before, but now it feels like it wants to rev to the top much quicker.  And the increased intake roar adds much coolness to the experience. 

In all, I'm quite pleased with my cheap mod.  It's not often that something good comes from such a simple investment.  Plus, this will keep me satisfied until I eventually gut the airbox completely, which is why I bought the spare box in the first place.

This, then, brings me to the third downside to modding your bike: You'll never stop.

Some New Bikes

As we approach the Fall, manufacturers are staring to release their models for 2013.  Of the bikes released so far, two that caught my eye were the Kawasaki Ninja 250R and the Victory Boardwalk.

The mini-Ninja caught my attention because I like small-bore bikes.  If I wasn't so lazy, I'd post a link to where I wrote about the 125cc Aprilia RS4 awhile back.  I still like that bike.

Anyway, I like the 250 Ninja because it's small, relatively light and inexpensive.  For 2013, it will be completely restyled to mimic its big bro, the ZX-10.  In addition, the bike will get new pistons, new exhausts and new crankcases. 

The frame is new, too, as is the suspension front and back and the wheels.  The instrument cluster is sport bike chic with an analog tach and a digital speedo with fuel gauge, trip meter and something called an "economical riding indicator."

A Big Deal, at least in Kawasaki's mind, is the use of dual throttle valves similar to the ones used by the bigger Ninjas.  Team Green says this adds linearity to the throttle response and helps boost power.  We'll just have to take their word for it.

I like the ZX-10's Mini-Me because it's a cheap bit of fun.  There are loads of 250 Ninjas out there available for a song and they prove you don't need to have millions of horsepower to have a good time on a bike.  Since they aren't very fast, the rider is more involved in keeping his speed up and carrying momentum.   I think they're good bikes and, with the refresh for '13, good-looking bikes.


Now onto the Victory Boardwalk. 

The Boardwalk is a traditional cruiser, so that means big engine, lots of chrome and whitewall tires.  Victory says it's made for laid-back cruising, which could be said about every cruiser, and that it's perfect for a "quick escape."  It weighs 675 lbs dry; I'm not sure it's doing anything quickly.  In essence, the Boardwalk is a styling exercise and a rather boring one at that, so pardon my lack of excitement.

The Boardwalk caught attention my not because I like it (I don't) but because I'm disappointed by it.  Victory, as a company, disappoints me.  They could be the American answer to Triumph (victory and triumph sort of mean the same thing) instead of being another Harley clone.  I would like to think that Americans, being the ingenious people we are, could do better than building another "laid-back" cruiser with an air-cooled V-twin.  Erik Buell can't be the only American who knows what a corner is.

I think Victory setting its sights on building a better HD is setting the bar too low.  I think they can do better and I'm disappointed that they can't look beyond HD.  It's too late for Victory to change its line-up and its image.  It's just a shame they aren't more than what they are.