Why you should NOT buy a Ural motorcycle

[Poacher Bob]

What a inferior machine! BMW's 1 WD rig woulda blown through there like shit through a tin horn...

[Schatzman]

Originally Posted by BMWzenrider

When did anyone say that I don't drive off-road???
This year's "Big Summer Trip"(tm) that I have been planning and saving for is to ride all sections of the Trans-Labrador Highway with my "tuna boat".
How many hundreds of miles of gravel is that going to be? I haven't bothered to add it up.
There are also some trails that I plan on trying up there and in Newfoundland.

I have fairly regularly taken my current rig places that might surprise you.
How about a frozen lake with 6-8" of snow on top and deeper drifts?
The sandy jeep trails in some of Florida's national forest lands?
(I did have to push the rig to get going again in one particularly soft spot where the wheels dug in to the axles. But I made it out on my own power.)
And many, MANY miles of gravel, dirt, and even mud.

And as many here know I also ride all winter, pretty much regardless of the weather.
I have not owned a car since 1998. I ride the sidecar year-round, including some longer trips in the dead of winter. Like Milwaukee to Duluth Minnesota and back in January a couple of years back.


The ice fishermen use old christmas trees to mark where they have drilled holes.


My only shot of me in some sand in Florida.


Chasing a deer through the woods, getting a bit muddy...


Pass from Wyoming to Colorado. Marked on map as "Road closed in Winter".
There was still snow up to the edge of the road in the end of June.
Outstanding scenery!!!


And of course, I have already posted in this thread the trail in Nevada where they tried to warn away passenger cars. That one was FUN!

I ride off-road...

To keep this on topic of why not to buy a Ural, my current rig will get me to most every place that a Ural/CJ/etc can get to other than some of the really challenging stuff where 99% aren't going to anyway.

Of course, that is just my opinion of what works for me....

I tried to stay out of this thread, but now you have done it....

I know you don't represent other BMW hack owners. So this is not directed at them.

1. You should stop posting. You are losing all credibility you have with each post.

2. If that is off road, then leaving my driveway is like crossing Moab. Those pictures are what we call "roads" in NH.

3. For 10k one could buy a Dnepr, put an R100 engine into it, and add the locking option for the open 2WD. That would destroy almost any other sidecar off road.

4. It's fine that you own a BMW. You should stop trying to claim your BMW is better then a Ural/Dnepr/ CJ in EVERY category. The BMW you own is not an off road machine and claiming it is one is hurts the reputation of BMW hack owners in this form. Please stop acting like your trip to Starbucks to buy a soy chai latte is some massive "off road" adventure.

[windmill]

I'm not sure how productive getting into a "my rig can beat up your rig" debate is, as we all have different desires, needs, and expectations.

-----

There are legitimate reasons for many folks to not get a Ural.

They are comparatively slow and low powered, lots of folks are not willing to just go with the flow.

They do have short maintenance intervals, for folks who do a lot of long distance riding in a limited time frame may find it a burden.

They are outdated technology and do not function as one would expect from a contemporary bike.

They are hand built using outdated production methods so reliability and quality control are not up to contemporary standards.

Fit and finish is more what you would expect of quality power equipment than a motorcycle

They are geared too high and the clutch is pressed to the limits for tight technical off road crawling or climbing extreme grades.

Tire and aftermarket options are very limited.

They have a limited dealer network

For their price, a person willing and able to build a rig can match or exceed a Ural to a large extent.

----

There are also many reasons they can be a good choice for some folks.

They have a dealer network.

They are available new, RTR with a excellent warranty, they will authorize independent shops, or even the owner to do warranty work.

IMWA offers a level of accessibility and willingness to work with customers that is otherwise unheard of with motor vehicle manufacturers.

They come standard with reverse, and 2wd is a comparatively inexpensive option

Service, and maintenance is easy, inexpensive, takes little time and can be done with common tools most riders will have on hand.

They are rugged, and capable of bearing significant abuse in rough conditions.

Parts are comparatively inexpensive, so if you do push it too hard or it breaks after the warranty is up repairs are not a major expense.

It's a very basic rig that can be easily adapted to particular needs and preferences, for folks who prefer old school bikes they are ideal.

Almost all upgrades and fixes they do can be retrofitted to older rigs.





I'll leave the UDF and history out of the mix, for some folks like me the constant attention they generate is a negative, and many folks could care less about the heritage of a vehicle and are only concern with what it will do for them.

It is kinda unusual the emotional reactions they create among sidecar enthusiasts, positive and negative, but I have noticed that sidecarists in general tend to be a little off regardless of what they ride so its all good, but it is a shame a few on both sides have been a bit unneighborly at times.

[YOUNZ]

Originally Posted by YOUNZ

Interesting thread. Regardless of the type, those that own them, seem to like them.
I can't afford a new rig (years of health issues) so, I am considering fabricating one myself. The question is, what's the most desirable bike, to sidecar, weight ratio? Say, the bike is in the four, to six hundred pound range? Thanks

Tried to change the subject for minute and get an opinion at the same time.

[Billtr96sn]

Younz, you are better off starting a new thread.

[YOUNZ]

Originally Posted by Billtr96sn

Younz, you are better off starting a new thread.

I had no idea, it was that complex!

[Sidecarjohn]

"The Sidecar Formula" is all about diversity and the unique. Most outfits/ rigs are singular creations, usually of an owner, but destined to be amended, improved, customised, or what have you.

Even when their are clearly no differences, as is the case initially with off the shelf Urals, owners add their own flavour, if not with the vehicle, then in the way they use it. Consequently, a gathering of sidecars always offers diversity, difference, and interest in a way that is probably never mirrored in any other aspect of motorcycling, or for that matter any aspect of vehicular enthusiasm. This forum is predominantly a great place to visit because of the diversity.

However, we've sadly gone down a rocky road these past days with this thread, and some of the stuff written hardly does some folk proud. My take on it all, if you ride an outfit you're OK with me. Your tastes, politics, likes, dislikes, and all the other human stuff are your affair and should be respected. Please let's MOVE ON !

[BMWzenrider]

Originally Posted by hogmaine

BMWzenrider

If those pics are your idea of riding off road. Then no you don't ride off road. You have a very nice rig, but it is not built for off road use.

I believe that what I said was that my current rig is capable of handling the 99% interval of where Ural/CJ owners take their rigs.
I don't believe that I made any claim that a rig like mine would motor through a quagmire. But then again, just how many miles of quagmire does the average Ural owner traverse out of every 100 miles driven???

If you read my comment differently, I am sorry that I was not more clear.

-----

And as far as my photos, I don't typically stop in the middle of the worst sections of my ride to take photos.
Like many travelers, I take photos when I am stopped to rest and enjoy the view, solitude, or nature of where I am traveling to.
Sometimes that will include stopping in the middle of the road to just take in and enjoy a particularly stiking bit of scenery. Most times it involves finding a safe pull-out.
The operative word being 'safe', as in a non-getting-stuckable place.

I generally don't collect photos just to show how 'tough' I am. I have taken a few of my rig during the winter just to prove that I do ride year-round. But again, I usually wait till I get to somewhere where there is a low likelyhood of getting stuck before I stop and take out the camera. (that is why regular viewers of this forum will recognize me recycling some of my photos.)
I prefer to focus on subjects of natural beauty, interest, or something that I found humorous. But those often don't belong in the Hacks forum.

I take a lot of photos of interpretive signs because I want to be able to read them and remember where I was. I don't take a lot of photos of the road surface, because I tend to see plenty of that and have a pretty good memory of what different driving surfaces look like.
And when shooting a photo of a landscape/moutain/wildlife/etc. it is generally considered bad composition to include the road you rode in on.
Fair enough?

----------
When I was grunting in the heat and humidity as darkness was falling to push my rig and get going again in the deep sugar-sand on that Florida jeep trail, no, I didn't stop to take a photo of the stuck bike.
One, it was nearly dark so the photo wouldn't have turned out well anyway.
Two, it was nearly dark so I just wanted to get out and to my campsite.
Three, it was damned hot & humid and I was sweating getting out and just didn't see the value in documenting how I was feeling at that moment.
Four, If I HAD stopped to take a photo anywhere during the rest of that ride it would have resulted in my getting bogged down and having trouble starting again, just like what happened at that slow turn.
I ain't stupid enough to get stuck on purpose just to take a photo of sand and trees.
----------

I usually focus on other parts of the trip; the scenery, history, etc.
As you would see if you popped over and looked through my travel albums.
on on my website.

And if you don't believe me, well I am sure that it will hurt my tender feelings and I probably will never leave my house again...

[BMWzenrider]

Originally Posted by gspell68

Sorry!
I was just going off looking at your avatar, it doesn't look like that hack has near as much clearance as a Ural.

NP, but as you have heard other state with certainty, if it ain't 8"-12" of slimey mud you aren't offroad, so I must just be a road-hugging pussy then...

Last time I checked, my rig has a measured ground clearance of 7.5" at the low point of the sidecar frame/struts.
That is when fully loaded with myself aboard.
I made a bracket to relocate the lower shock mounting on the sidecar suspension to raise the frame and give me a bit more clearance than stock.
The bike itself has a bit less at only 5.5" to the low point of the catalytic just ahead of the rear wheel.

As you can see from the pristine finish of the exhaust, I have used all of that clearance and more in some sections I have traveled. (notice the scrapes on the sidestand leg too?)
IIRC, that photo was taken at the request of another inmate in the hacks forum here, but I cannot remember what he was trying to figure out besides minimum ground clearance for my model of bike.


The listed ground clearance for a Ural is 9", and parts of it are significantly more.
So yes, it is obviously able to go through deeper ruts/mud/etc than mine, of course.
That is one of the selling points for many owners.

But part of my fun is finding out out just what my limits really are.
I try to take advantage of all the clearance that I have in order to find some of the more wild/isolated places using the tool that I have available to me.

I have found that my usual limiting factor for me are the lower struts, which can run 'aground' on the center ridge of a rutted trail, but can manage some more deeply grooved sections by altering my line and riding the center ridge with the bike's wheels. Of course, that doesn't work as well when it starts getting slick, and I have been forced to heave the bike around and backtrack on more than one occasion. Just part of the fun! (but would have been easier to get turned around several times if I had my reverse gear back...)

I have also hit the belly of the sidecar body fairly hard on protruding rock on occasion, but so far with no permanent damage other than removing some paint and a few flakes of glass from the underside.

This rig is not magical, it won't get through everything, hit centermass for a one-shot kill everytime, and never need reloading.
But it works for most of what I have asked of it so far.

AND, my sidecar body is large enough to provide me with a comfy camper/bed available for my sore old body when I get to the end of the day.

[windmill]

Whats the use of comparing an apple to an orange in a whole basket of fruit?

2 different rigs for 2 different intended uses, both can do most of what the other can do, both can't do a few things the other can do.
So what, all that really matters is they match the owners desires.

"I said", "you said", bla-bla-bla, why flog it to death?

[Vanishing Point]

Forty pages and not one mind was changed.

Though some of us Ural owners are now saddened to know that the vehicles we've enjoyed so much are merely beacons shining the light upon our fiscally foolish and technologically challenged ways. I'm glad that I have my Suzuki Savage to fall back upon as a ride that will demonstrate to everyone I run across my sound understanding of the value of a dollar as well as the importance of modern reliable engineering.

I hope I have as much fun though. We'll see.

[BMWzenrider]

Originally Posted by windmill

I'm not sure how productive getting into a "my rig can beat up your rig" debate is, as we all have different desires, needs, and expectations.

-----

There are legitimate reasons for many folks to not get a Ural.

......
----

There are also many reasons they can be a good choice for some folks.

......
----

It is kinda unusual the emotional reactions they create among sidecar enthusiasts, positive and negative, but I have noticed that sidecarists in general tend to be a little off regardless of what they ride so its all good, but it is a shame a few on both sides have been a bit unneighborly at times.

A MOST excellent post, and better put than my obviously feeble attempts!

That, Sir, should be made into a new thread and stickied so that it is permanently available wisdom to be handed down over the generations!

As to your last point, yeah, as you may have noticed I have not been around here for a while for various reasons. Guess I forgot just how personally some people get about their choice of ride.
I thought that I had made plenty of "IMHO" and "For me" statements in my posts, but some owners just seem to be looking for a fight.
I really stepped into the buzzsaw there, didn't I?

[windmill]

Originally Posted by BMWzenrider

A MOST excellent post, and better put than my obviously feeble attempts!

That, Sir, should be made into a new thread and stickied so that it is permanently available wisdom to be handed down over the generations!

As to your last point, yeah, as you may have noticed I have not been around here for a while for various reasons. Guess I forgot just how personally some people get about their choice of ride.
I thought that I had made plenty of "IMHO" and "For me" statements in my posts, but some owners just seem to be looking for a fight.
I really stepped into the buzzsaw there, didn't I?

Put up your dukes sucker.

It's easy to go a little too far when looking at a screen rather than a face, BTDT.

IMO, we should all try to remember most folks come here to share what we have in common, not bicker over our differences.

[Schatzman]

Originally Posted by BMWzenrider

I believe that what I said was that my current rig is capable of handling the 99% interval of where Ural/CJ owners take their rigs.

Snip.
Most times it involves finding a safe pull-out.
The operative word being 'safe', as in a non-getting-stuckable place.

Most Ural/ Dnepr/ CJ owners I know take their rigs to hardcore off road spots.

If you think people take their rigs out to get them stuck, you are sadly mistaken. The object is to push your rig and yourself as hard as possible.

Having my rear drive blow up off road 3 miles from the nearest paved road in deep mud, large rocks, and large hills was not a goal I had in mind. Working with friends to flat tow my hack those 3 miles while the rear drive kept locking up was a challenge to say the least. In the end after watching my friend's Dnepr being pushed to its limits while towing my russian tuna boat and being pushed to my physical and mental limits I felt a feeling of satisfaction.

That is the difference. Driving my hack to Starbucks does not give me satisfaction. I want to push myself and my rig as hard as I can. If I owned a BMW hack like yours I would not be able to do that. I would be forced to drive on the highway and a few dirt roads while making my way to the next Starbucks.

[BMWzenrider]

Originally Posted by Schatzman

If you think people take their rigs out to get them stuck, you are sadly mistaken. The object is to push your rig and yourself as hard as possible.

Did you not read the post immediately following the one that you quoted, or are you doing it on purpose just to stir the pot?

Originally Posted by BMWzenrider

But part of my fun is finding out out just what my limits really are.

But I am not rising up to take any of the chum that you have been flinging.
Sorry Charlie!

btw - Starbucks chai is only so-so, I prefer to find the independant coffee shops when I travel. Sometimes I get free pie!