View Single Post
Old 03-02-2008, 11:43 PM   #36
mcnut
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Location: Bakersfield CA & Sammamish WA
Oddometer: 1,360
VR, I applaud your efforts here but....

I really like your work here (and on the gear spread chart as well), but...... I don't understand the logic of listing and as a result ordering the bikes with a full tank of fuel!!!!!
Given most bike will travel more or less about the same distance on a gallon of gas, why allow gas capacity to enter into the ranking or ordinal? Filling a tank to full capacity is a choice the owner makes. For many, generous fuel capacity is an attribute but the standard you have chosen turns this feature into a liability! Your chart doesn't list fuel capacity making it difficult to back the weight of the fuel out for those wanting to level the playing field.
Wouldn't a wet, ready to ride weight with out fuel paint a more accurate picture?

Even though I don't agree with it's current form this is a very useful collection of data.

MCNut

P.S. I own two 04 KTM EXCs. One with a stock 2.2gal tank and the other with an aftermarket 6.6gal tank. How should these otherwise identical bikes be charted and why? Empty the bikes weight difference is less than 1%, full the difference is over 12%. I believe the 6.6gal bike should only be penalize the additional 1-2lbs of the over-sized tank itself.

mcnut screwed with this post 03-02-2008 at 11:52 PM
mcnut is offline   Reply With Quote