"Character"

[Secret Buzzard]

This topic was brought to mind by the recent thread entitled: "If you were to switch brands..."

 

We all know what it is when we see it, but I have a hard time putting it into words. About the best I can do is say that it's a flaw (or flaws) that gets overlooked because there are other beneficial things that make it desirable. That still doesn't define it enough.

 

What say you?

 

It seems we assign to bikes made in the west more "character" than eastern produced models. Why is that? My '07 Tiger seems easier to ride and definitely work on than my friends '07 VTX. Yet they both have flaws, but the Tiger has "character" while the VTX is just a big derivative bike. Probably my friend would defend his Honda as having just as much "character" as the Triumph, but he'd be wrong. My GS has it, my old KLR didn't (that's why it's gone!)

 

Not bashing bikes here, just exploring why we choose one type over another.

[GRB60]

It's history creeping into the present.

Brit bikes were very popular and stylish in the past. Now they are thought to have character.

Japanese bikes were utilitarian and bland. Not a great deal of style but well made, reliable machines. No character.

 

I don't really think it has anything to do with your Tiger or his VTX.

[Quinn]

Character as applied to my RT sure seems to involve a lot of "they all do that" and "yeah, that's normal."

 

But it doesn't have to be all bad. Any oddity I think adds character. Things like the separate turn signal buttons, funny front suspension, and the old perpendicular crank lever come to mind.

 

----

 

 

[Boffin]

Back in the 1970's when the Japanese bike industry was just starting to drive the nails into the British bike industries coffin, we defined character as "having to stop every 5 mile to bolt something back on".

 

These days I think it boils down to lack of perfection. My Honda Accord diesel (Accura in the USA, Euro Accord in the antipodes) starts first time, has fantastic ride, handles well, is quiet, is well equiped and sips on its fuel - but there is no character.

My RT is fussy about tyre pressures, needs accurate valve and throttle body setup, rattles and shakes at idle, uses oil and has idiosyncratic controls. Character in spades.

 

Andy

[upflying]

Character has a hand crafted persona.

Mass production is detrimental to character.

[kmac]

I mentioned in another thread that while on a ride with my dad, he was on a 2012 HD FLHX and I was on my 1996 R1100RT, it seemed as though most people who stopped to look at the bikes while they were parked were looking more at my old bike.

 

I think Asian bikes and now even the HD bikes are so common that they hardly get a second glance.

 

Euro bikes are often a bit more expensive for a comparable Asian bike so people think "this person must be a serious rider". So there is more interest there.

 

Then, as has been mentioned, Asian bikes are SO mass produced that they become generic a bit. In dirt bikes lets say, Asian bikes produce a great MX bike and usually a decent enduro bike based on the older MX bike, then enduro version is usually a bad compromise. Where as KTM produces a state of the art top line bike in MX, SX, enduro, and desert forms all specialized for your needs. Much more focused and niche oriented, thus with more character.

 

Then I think there is the factory support parts for the euro bikes. You can get TONS of stuff from KTM, BMW and even HD right from the factory. Trick stuff. On the Asian bikes not so much, it needs to be after market stuff. Yamaha probably has the best factory support stuff with their GYTR line and Star Rider line of parts. But no where near the stuff you can get from Euro and US brands.

 

When I see a BMW or similar, I say "this guy is a serious rider"

He/she Has invested 20K+ on his bike where as a comparable Asian bike is maybe 15k ish, so this person MUST be serious.

[Guest Kakugo]

Back in the 1970's when the Japanese bike industry was just starting to drive the nails into the British bike industries coffin, we defined character as "having to stop every 5 mile to bolt something back on".

 

Or arrive home in a cloud of smoke (happened to me).

 

Truth to be told I have always believed the mainstream definition of "character" is "I don't want to see how badly engineered my bike is and how much I am spending on repairs".

My definition of character is "This is the bike I want right now".

 

 

 

 

[outpost22]

He/she Has invested 20K+ on his bike where as a comparable Asian bike is maybe 15k ish, so this person MUST be serious.

 

or really stupid

 

Actually character in bikes refers to their owners. Ya see, it builds "character" in the individual who must put up with all the idiosyncrasies of owning these bikes.

[Albert]

I think character, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. Back in the 70's Honda motorcycles were universally regarded as having no "character". Now if you see a meticulously restored 750 four from that era, people suddenly wax poetic about its unique "character". Maybe character is grown, not manufactured.

[Kitsap]

I have an Omega and a Timex watch. The more expensive of the two is more finnicky commanding more of my attention yet gives me a great deal of pleasure to wear. I never think about the other, it suffers a great deal of abuse coldly going about its business.

[BULLman]

It could be soul. As others mentioned, its code for "Pain in the a$$"

 

My Triumph Thunderbird Sport had tons of character and was more enjoyable to ride than my Triumph Tiger (LGB).

 

The TBS, had a more diesel sound to the engine - better wind management (due to the little fairing it had) - but, my fat a$$ didn't fit on it and also keeping 2 bikes with too much for me - so, I sold it.

 

The Tiger had character, too.

 

I miss both - and most likely I will buy another Triumph.

 

My friend has a '99 TBS, if he every decides to sell it - I hope he calls me first

 

My Kawasaki Concours was a very, very good bike - but, it did not have any character - except, being, inexpensive and reliable and a good value. Maybe it was the clip ons. But me and that bike did not get along.

 

My HD Road King - lots of character

[jimbullitt]

I think of character, as being based on, the dood with his arse, sitting in the saddle.

I thought my 1988 FXR had character. I kept it looking about as new as I could, and appreciated folks that told me, 'it looked like new'-even at over 15 years old.

My first streetbike, a 1979 CB650, was the means to an end-but I improved it's character, with aftermarket shocks, and it's previous owner had painted it a 'Cadillac burgundy' color. It became the means to an end, when I sold it, to buy the FXR, in `88. I wish

I still had all of the motorcycles that I have been graced and privledged to have owned, and enjoyed...

Onward to the next adventure, with the purchase of the `12 K1600GTL-which I am hopefully picking up, tomorrow!

[tallman]

Laura Croft, as portrayed by Angelina Jolie, has character.

 

Laura Croft, as drawn in the original comic/cartoon genre, does not.

 

So...

[Dave Wood]

I think character, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. Back in the 70's Honda motorcycles were universally regarded as having no "character". Now if you see a meticulously restored 750 four from that era, people suddenly wax poetic about its unique "character". Maybe character is grown, not manufactured.

 

Good Point - +1

 

I recently rode a very low mileage 1970/71 CB750. I can't say that it took me back in time as what I remember as a incredibly sensational "soulless" bike back in "71 had much more "character" than my current RT. Breaker point ignition, Kehien "slider" carbs with four throttle cables - yep, all intact and working just fine. It still sounded great on the stock pipes.

 

Funny - the trans/clutch on that bike worked better than the RT as well.

 

[kmac]

Funny - the trans/clutch on that bike worked better than the RT as well.

 

Most bikes I have owned have a better clutch and trans than my RT!

Well not my Briggs minibike with the centrifigul clutch and NO trans....that was worse than my RT.

[lkchris]

I'm a BMW boxer twin fan and to me the most important thing about a bike is the feel of the engine. Plus, obviously, the feel of the bike as influenced by this engine design.

 

This is pretty standard engineering stuff but it makes a difference you can notice.

 

"Character," then, is all the "Germanness" of the bike and sometimes that's frustrating, but most of the time I like it. Whatever's in 2nd place first of all I could care less about and second of all surely isn't even close. I admit I'm not even test riding anything else.

 

My Mercedes diesel with its 25,000 psi injection system and 5 injections per cylinder per power stroke is way cooler than any chebbie with a 50-year-old engine, too. It's way more expensive and probably not as reliable, either.

 

The watch comparison hits the nail on the head.