"Le Mans Sleeper" V11 in Tonti frame

[LowRyter]

All this talk about more power and faster...it has a place.  But no one rides a Guzzi for that.  It's the "feel", the inertia of that locomotive flywheel pulling you, the steady feel in corners.   I ride my Ducati and it's almost too good.  Some times it's just boring.  I get on one of the Guzzis, it still gives me a smile.  I like all my bikes but I spent so much time on the Duc, I get on the Guzzi and it's a nice change.  Lately, the Duc has been sitting.  I don't have enough curvy roads for it.

[audiomick]

17 hours ago, pete roper said:

 NOBODY HAS TO AGREE WITH ME!

 

Would you be mad at me if I did?

 

15 hours ago, Speedfrog said:

 more tolerant and light hearted.

IMHO... Not cool!

Chris, from my Australian point of view, Pete is light hearted and tolerant.

Narrow-minded reactionary arseholes is a bit of an Australian speciality, at least in the time of my youth and in the countryside where I grew up. Going by what he writes here, Pete isn't one of them.

[Lucky Phil]

The problem is people don't understand the difference between engineering, designing and fabricating. Many of these crude and impractical creations are all about fabrication (often quite good) with a pinch of usually bad design thrown in and scant regard to the engineering.  

Anyone with some basic tools and hand skills can strip components off a motorcycle (usually the stuff that makes it a practical riding proposition and road legal) and call it a "custom" or an "interpretation" of god knows what. The truth is motorcycles are not "art". They can be beautiful and an expression of a designers philosophy but if they don't adequately fulfil the design brief then they are just a piece of crafted machinery of limited utility. When I see a "customised" motorcycle like some of the examples shown that are intended to be road ridden then I'm with Pete. These bikes don't fulfil the design brief of a real world road rideable machine in the 21st or even the 20th century in most cases.  

The other issue is a cultural one. An interesting observation I have made watching many many US based car and motorcycle shows is Individuality is valued above just about everything else in the US and that includes practicality in more cases than I can sometimes believe. Most of these types of bikes are aimed at the American market and the US market is also where the dollar is to spend on such things. And if it's aimed at the American market then these days by default it's aimed at us as well.

If you want to study the most brilliant motorcycle designers on the planet then just call into your local motorcycle shop and see what they are selling. With all the limitations and regulations they are lawfully bound to observe in every country in the world and the necessity to make the product real world road rideable you can't help but be impressed. These people make "customizers" look like the backyard hackers the vast majority really are. 

 

Phil

[Chuck]

Quote

The problem is people don't understand the difference between engineering, designing and fabricating.

This..

[pete roper]

And that from a man who builds aeroplanes from scratch.

ignore the wisdom at your peril.

[Speedfrog]

Ok, I may have been a bit *off the mark* when singling out Pete for his delivery. It seemed a little harsh when I first read it, late at night and perhaps lacking clarity. There is a lot of wisdom in that post.

The thing is, when I’m looking at a nice bike - read unique, different & appealing to my sense of taste - an object of desire - it is for entertainment purposes only and the dreamer in me doesn’t want to be reminded of all the mechanical shortcomings, engineering oversight or design impracticality that comes with it.

A left brain / right brain kind of thing.

I’d like to think that if I were to build it myself - or buy it if I could - I’d have a more pragmatic approach in considering all aspects, but I don’t have the skills nor the tools-time-space-money-knowledge or fortitude to undertake a *build* like that, so yeah, I respect anyone that tries, even if the result is far from perfect... 

[4corsa]

The problem is people don't understand the difference between engineering, designing and fabricating. Many of these crude and impractical creations are all about fabrication (often quite good) with a pinch of usually bad design thrown in and scant regard to the engineering.  
Anyone with some basic tools and hand skills can strip components off a motorcycle (usually the stuff that makes it a practical riding proposition and road legal) and call it a "custom" or an "interpretation" of god knows what. The truth is motorcycles are not "art". They can be beautiful and an expression of a designers philosophy but if they don't adequately fulfil the design brief then they are just a piece of crafted machinery of limited utility. When I see a "customised" motorcycle like some of the examples shown that are intended to be road ridden then I'm with Pete. These bikes don't fulfil the design brief of a real world road rideable machine in the 21st or even the 20th century in most cases.  
The other issue is a cultural one. An interesting observation I have made watching many many US based car and motorcycle shows is Individuality is valued above just about everything else in the US and that includes practicality in more cases than I can sometimes believe. Most of these types of bikes are aimed at the American market and the US market is also where the dollar is to spend on such things. And if it's aimed at the American market then these days by default it's aimed at us as well.
If you want to study the most brilliant motorcycle designers on the planet then just call into your local motorcycle shop and see what they are selling. With all the limitations and regulations they are lawfully bound to observe in every country in the world and the necessity to make the product real world road rideable you can't help but be impressed. These people make "customizers" look like the backyard hackers the vast majority really are. 
 
Phil

"The truth is motorcycles are not art" is not the truth. One of the greatest museums on the face of the earth (The Guggenheim in New York) in 1998 dedicated its entire premises to an exhibition titled The Art of the Motorcycle. https://www.guggenheim.org/exhibition/the-art-of-the-motorcycle
That doesn't mean that all motorcycles are art for sure. But in the hands of someone like Massimo Tamburini, who was trained as an engineer and also had a rare gift for design - the Ducati 996 and MV Agusta F4 most certainly are art. I would argue that they are a higher form of art than a typical sculpture found on a museum floor in that they have to satisfy a far greater list requirements and need to incorporate engineering, aerodynamics, and economics, in addition to theories of art and design.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[Lucky Phil]

29 minutes ago, 4corsa said:

"The truth is motorcycles are not art" is not the truth. One of the greatest museums on the face of the earth (The Guggenheim in New York) in 1998 dedicated its entire premises to an exhibition titled The Art of the Motorcycle. https://www.guggenheim.org/exhibition/the-art-of-the-motorcycle
That doesn't mean that all motorcycles are art for sure. But in the hands of someone like Massimo Tamburini, who was trained as an engineer and also had a rare gift for design - the Ducati 996 and MV Agusta F4 most certainly are art. I would argue that they are a higher form of art than a typical sculpture found on a museum floor in that they have to satisfy a far greater list requirements and need to incorporate engineering, aerodynamics, and economics, in addition to theories of art and design.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
 

They don't fit my definition of art and I've owned 3 of them. Beautiful yes, functional, yes, art, no. 

Phil

[4corsa]

What is your definition of art Phil?  

[gstallons]

Now , at one time you could have said the motorcycle was an art form . IDK when modes of transportation stopped being "art" designed as a creation of the creator to become "we have to make what the consumer will buy" and what the Zeitgeist dictates .  

[footgoose]

A couple of applicable quotes from Frank Lloyd Wright:

"Art is a discovery and development of elementary principles of nature into beautiful forms, suitable for human use."

"Form follows function, -that has been misunderstood. Form and function should be one, joined in a spiritual function."

On another note, The Wright brothers built the first airplanes in their garage from scratch, with no education and little support. They built and repaired bicycles prior and were self taught. Possibly a stretch with today's topic but not that far, and the human principles are the same.

If innovators don't understand the difference between engineering, designing and fabricating, I don't see a problem with it.

Mfg's don't set the standard for what we want. They play catch up to the standard we define when we buy their bike and "finish it."

[Scud]

From the description that was linked to in the original post:

PAUL FÜHRMANN’S MISSION in life is to build custom motorcycles that “seamlessly blend artistry and engineering.” That’s not only a noble goal, but it’s also a great way to describe the machines that he chooses to work on. Paul specializes in classic Moto Guzzis—especially the mythical Tonti frame Moto Guzzis of the 1970s.

This Moto Guzzi café racer is one of his best builds yet. It cuts an elegant silhouette, while still giving off a raw, mechanical vibe. And it’s a bit of a sleeper, combining the engine of a Moto Guzzi V11 with the Tonti frame of a 1970s Le Mans Mk II.

Emphasis mine.

For me, this bike is an artistic expression. It also seems to be well-built (engineered and fabricated). I like it. But put it next to an original LeMans Mk II and ask me to choose one to take one home to ride. I'll take the original LeMans. Then ask me to choose one to park one in my living room as art. I'll still take the original LeMans. (For art, I'd prefer the first 850 LeMans, but the Mk II is still a thing of beauty.)

Other people might make different choices, obviously Paul Fuhrmann did. Art and utility are both subjective - based (respectively) on personal taste and intended use.

[4corsa]

Well-stated Scud.

This brings up the heart of the conversation "blending artistry and engineering". The epitome of this pursuit was during the Renaissance, with Leonardo da Vinci likely being the most notable example. The best artists were also engineers and/or architects and vice-versa. And it was not only from their training, but their patrons expected them to have a keen interest and curiosity in both.
This is no longer the case. In most cultures today, professions are pigeon-holed to focus on one thing and do it well. Most current engineering programs are devoid of any significant classes in the arts. As an architect for past 40 years, I deal with capable engineers on a daily basis. But try to have a conversation with them about any design intents or theories, and you get "just tell me what depth you need the beam and I'll do the calcs and let you know the options". Most of them couldn't tell you the first thing about the accomplishments of Leonardo, Eiffel, or Wright.
The increasingly homely automotive and motorcycle designs of the past two decades are evidence of lack empathy and collaboration between engineering and design departments (I would suggest especially evident in recent design trends from Japan, who had previously produced some outstanding designs).

The single exception I've experienced consistently (having completed a few projects there) is the design and engineering culture of Italy. There, engineers are still expected to be well-informed of all arts and history, and are passionate about it. Engineer/Designers such as Tamburini, Zagato, Michelotti, Taglioni, and Magni all had in-depth and integrated knowledge of every aspect of the cars or bikes they were designing and were usually involved in every step. This is true "blending of artistry and engineering", and the reason why Italy has produced, and will continue to produce, the most revered and emulated designs of our age.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[Speedfrog]

There is this notion floating around of the motorcycle as a single entity.

Comparing production bikes to full custom build seems a bit unfair when considering the amount of resources and budget of a manufacturer and those of (often) a single individual.

On the balance, the manufacturer’s engineering & design teams have to adhere to a strict specification bill where the individual builder is freed of all constraints, allowing a full expression of his/her creativity.

Another aspect is motorcycle racing, where a production bike is being transformed by an individual or a small team into a racing machine, engineering becomes primordial in achieving the best performance possible and aesthetics are only a result of functionality. Another form of creativity.

If you think of the motorcycle as a blend of this trio of design/engineering/fabrication, it’s fair to say that different people value different ratios of these elements for what represents their ideal motorcycle. 

[4corsa]

And that from a man who builds aeroplanes from scratch.
ignore the wisdom at your peril.

Not sure if Pete is referring to Chuck or Phil as the airplane builder, but wanted to share this photo of the Cozy Mk III (Burt Rutan design) that my brother built from scratch from a set of blueprints. "Only" 7 years to complete...

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk