That's a bland, bland bike with no character

[Stu]

To answer the OP's question and not bring HD in to the equation! 

 

A lot of people will say they are boring and bland because they have heard someone else say it, read it on a forum or in a bike mag! 

 

Probably never ridden one to make their own mind up! 

 

But who cares what others think of your bike as long as you enjoy it! 

 

[Mickly]

I think we’re a long way from the old UJM’s

much more (reliable) variety these days

[S-Westerly]

1 hour ago, Gerontious said:

 

Thats because the last load of drama has given you a taste for it. Do what I do... walk away, do something useful like, oh... I don't know. search for a Harley bashing website, or something. (must be American based though.... must be.)

 

like this, perhaps. https://www.goingfaster.com/angst/main.htm

That was an interesting link, to put it mildly! 

 

Never ceases to amaze me how worked up people can get over some things. And yes I know the words "pot, kettle and black" might apply here.

[Liveware Problem]

On topic, I have ridden the nc750x and nc750s, nothing wrong with it at all.

 

However I prefer the feel and look of the tracer 700, feels more nimble and quicker.

[Joe85]

On 09/10/2021 at 14:35, PaulCa said:

"That's a bland, bland bike with no character", said a friend when I told him my new bike was an NC750X.

 

What exactly does this mean?  Granted my friend is a life long bike tinkerer, runs his own business, but what he usually does is goes out and finds death traps from bygone years, usually small 2-strokes and soups them up into being even more of death traps.  He owns a V6 custom bike, which he is actually fitting a supercharger to it now.  It already had something like 200bhp.  He does not own any bike gear, rides in a normal coat, jeans and trainers.  So I don't take bike advice from him, except maybe to discuss bike mechanical issues.

 

But this "Character" they talk about, I still trying to work out what they mean.  To be honest by first thought is that many bikes have faults and annoyances which people learn to live with then refer to it as "character".

 

I concur with your friend. I had one as a courtesy bike a few years back. 
 

After a few days I just gave it back and decided I’d use the car until I got my back back.

 

Everything about it was just… meh. No faults that I can think of, it just excelled at absolutely nothing, either.

[OldEssexMan]

In response to the OP's point: I too have difficulty with this question of "character". I have asked many people what it means and received just as many answers. The nearest I can get to understanding it is, "the indefinable aspects of a bike that either mean you like or dislike it." As it's indefinable that means it's a matter of personal opinion, let's keep our opinions to ourselves!

[fastbob]

4 minutes ago, OldEssexMan said:

In response to the OP's point: I too have difficulty with this question of "character". I have asked many people what it means and received just as many answers. The nearest I can get to understanding it is, "the indefinable aspects of a bike that either mean you like or dislike it." As it's indefinable that means it's a matter of personal opinion, let's keep our opinions to ourselves!

If we kept our opinions to ourselves it would completely defeat the object of participating in a chat forum . 

[SometimesSansEngine]

When I was narrowing down bikes last time round it was between the Z1000SX and F800GT. I wanted both with full OEM luggage. 

 

I knew the Z1000SX would be less 'bland', but in the end decided it was too much right now. If I was planning some tours it would have been right up there. But for now I could get what I needed with much better fuel economy on the BMW and not spend as much money on buying it. 

 

Maybe I'm too logical, but hey I took it around a track and still had a great load of fun. I know other bikes would get my heart racing more but I only have so much space to store them so need one that ticks a range of boxes.

 

And even though I've owned it for a year now, I genuinely still occasionally think "I haven't cleaned the chain in ages", then remember... I don't have one

[OldEssexMan]

2 hours ago, fastbob said:

If we kept our opinions to ourselves it would completely defeat the object of participating in a chat forum . 

I don't want opinions, I want facts

[DuRavary]

Character is subjective. Early on I had a Honda CD175. Friends who had other bikes, often similar sized 2-strokes, claimed that it was bland and characterless but at that stage of my life it gave me a lot of riding pleasure and experiences. More recently I’ve done a lot of my riding on a Pan European. For a lot of journeys it could be called bland and characterless because it just gets on with it and gets the job done with no fuss and no drama. On those journeys it tends to be the roads themselves that are actually the bland and boring part. On other roads it comes alive when it’s torque and handling qualities come into play. One bike more than one character. If I was commuting I’d be happy to use what appeared to be a bland bike when what was actually important was reliability, economy and weather protection. For the riding I do by choice I’m not particularly worried about what a bike looks like as long as it gives me the feed back I’m looking for. The bike I’ve had most fun from in recent years was a DR175. I doubt it had a 0-60 time because it didn’t go particularly fast, it would never have won a beauty competition but, boy, was it good to ride. 

[Mississippi Bullfrog]

1 hour ago, OldEssexMan said:

I don't want opinions, I want facts

But there are very few facts that apply to the purchase of motorcycles. Most of the reasons people choose bike A rather than bike B are subjective.

 

I love my Bobber but there are no facts about it that would persuade anyone else to buy one. You have to like the styling and characteristics so much that you forgive its many faults. If I could only have one bike I wouldn't have the Bobber because it's bonkers. 

[PaulCa]

1 hour ago, DuRavary said:

Character is subjective. Early on I had a Honda CD175. Friends who had other bikes, often similar sized 2-strokes, claimed that it was bland and characterless but at that stage of my life it gave me a lot of riding pleasure and experiences. More recently I’ve done a lot of my riding on a Pan European. For a lot of journeys it could be called bland and characterless because it just gets on with it and gets the job done with no fuss and no drama. On those journeys it tends to be the roads themselves that are actually the bland and boring part. On other roads it comes alive when it’s torque and handling qualities come into play. One bike more than one character. If I was commuting I’d be happy to use what appeared to be a bland bike when what was actually important was reliability, economy and weather protection. For the riding I do by choice I’m not particularly worried about what a bike looks like as long as it gives me the feed back I’m looking for. The bike I’ve had most fun from in recent years was a DR175. I doubt it had a 0-60 time because it didn’t go particularly fast, it would never have won a beauty competition but, boy, was it good to ride. 

 

Character seems also to be about rider identity, group collective and "competitive nature". 

 

Jack of all trades, master of none.  To me is better than a master of, say, something specific, I can rarely use on a daily ride, like 100+mph or 16" ground clearance and off road shocks.  (Remembers foundly the KLE500's opinion on speed bumps.  It just didn't have one, completely ignored them.)

A specialised commuter focused bike doesn't suit me either.  If I wanted a bike with "that" character I would probably have went with a 125cc auto for £4000 and got 100 zillion miles to the gallon and full body wind protection.  Where's the FUN in that?  To be honest I used to find it fun, but it gets old fast when you have to plan over takes for over a mile.  Such a sense of achievement when you succeed though.... or shame when you have to abort.  I once spent 20 miles trying to over take a lorry on the motorway on a 125 only to realise, the only reason I could go faster than the lorry (56mph), was because I was in it's slip stream.  It took me 3 attempts to work this out.

 

The NC if you work with it will still get to "oh ****" speed quick enough on twisties and will go round them faster than I'm prepared to go round them.   Who cares that as soon as the road opens the Suicide Sunday power rangers blast past you up over the ton.   The places that I am comfortable to get above the limit these days are so rare, it's not really worth having a bike with a lot of authority in that area.  Not when you factor the budget, bike, insurance, tax and maintenance all go up, not to mention the tickets/points for trying to stretch the poor cobbled pony's legs once in a while.  Not worth it "to me".

 

[S-Westerly]

4 hours ago, OldEssexMan said:

I don't want opinions, I want facts

I doubt anyone bought a motorbike based on "facts". The bike's speed, weight, style are all facts but not every biker is going to like the facts about every bike. Buying a bike is totally subjective which means opinions. 

[fastbob]

4 hours ago, OldEssexMan said:

I don't want opinions, I want facts

But this is a discussion about something that is highly subjective . One person's bland is another person's user friendly just as one person's " Bags of character " is another person's " Bag of spanners "  This is not a subject where " Facts " have any relevance . And that's a fact .

[fastbob]

2 hours ago, DuRavary said:

Character is subjective. Early on I had a Honda CD175. Friends who had other bikes, often similar sized 2-strokes, claimed that it was bland and characterless but at that stage of my life it gave me a lot of riding pleasure and experiences. More recently I’ve done a lot of my riding on a Pan European. For a lot of journeys it could be called bland and characterless because it just gets on with it and gets the job done with no fuss and no drama. On those journeys it tends to be the roads themselves that are actually the bland and boring part. On other roads it comes alive when it’s torque and handling qualities come into play. One bike more than one character. If I was commuting I’d be happy to use what appeared to be a bland bike when what was actually important was reliability, economy and weather protection. For the riding I do by choice I’m not particularly worried about what a bike looks like as long as it gives me the feed back I’m looking for. The bike I’ve had most fun from in recent years was a DR175. I doubt it had a 0-60 time because it didn’t go particularly fast, it would never have won a beauty competition but, boy, was it good to ride. 

I started off on a CB 175 which was the more modern version with twin carbs and five gears . 

[Steve_M]

Here’s an analogy. 
 

A modern built house on an estate. It’s thermally efficient, needs nothing more than decorating occasionally, has excellent fittings, ergonomically well laid out and sufficiently spacious to accommodate a family.

 

vs

 

A 400yr old stone built cottage that is picturesque, though draughty, in constant need of maintenance, has a leaky roof, dripping guttering, low ceilings, small rooms, and outdated fittings.

 

The former might be considered bland, the latter “characterful”.

 

[Pie man]

14 minutes ago, Steve_M said:

Here’s an analogy. 
 

A modern built house on an estate. It’s thermally efficient, needs nothing more than decorating occasionally, has excellent fittings, ergonomically well laid out and sufficiently spacious to accommodate a family.

 

vs

 

A 400yr old stone built cottage that is picturesque, though draughty, in constant need of maintenance, has a leaky roof, dripping guttering, low ceilings, small rooms, and outdated fittings.

 

The former might be considered bland, the latter “characterful”.

 

Woah there. Ssshh You'll have insulate Britain joining in with that analogy  

[fastbob]

17 minutes ago, Pie man said:

Woah there. Ssshh You'll have insulate Britain joining in with that analogy  

Insulate Britain ? Nothing that a good dousing from a two liter Coke bottle of well fermented lorry drivers piss wouldn't sort out . 

[Steve_M]

58 minutes ago, Pie man said:

Woah there. Ssshh You'll have insulate Britain joining in with that analogy  

If they want to make a difference they are quite welcome to clamber in my loft and add the insulation we’ve bought for the job.

[fastbob]

I'm sure , like me , during any discussion on the subject of Blandness , your thoughts turn inevitably towards biscuits . Indeed , not only to biscuits ,  but to those biscuits that reside at the opposite end of the baking spectrum to their more illustrious cousins such as the Viscount and the Hob Nob . I refer of course to the humble but  aspirationaly  named Rich Tea biscuit . Neither rich nor containing any actual tea * , this bland biscuit nonetheless has a role to play in that it serves to compliment a steaming brew by not overpowering the flavour and not being so sweet as to render the British Industry Standard two sugars inadequate by contrast .  So I present to you the Rich Tea biscuit . But which is best ? The traditional round format or the lesser known but slightly more flamboyant Rich Tea Finger ?        * Fact . 

Edited October 11, 2021 by fastbob

[S-Westerly]

Definitely bland. Almost as bad as the Nice biscuit which isn't nice in my opinion. 

[Mississippi Bullfrog]

Then there's the new fangled KitKat Honeycomb. Now there's a biscuit with 'character'. Revolting and not at all nice to eat, but certainly not bland. 

 

Given a choice - Rich Tea (round or finger) or KitKat Honeycomb - I'd go with the Rich Tea every day.

[billy sugger]

I actually spread marmite on rich tea

[fastbob]

27 minutes ago, billy sugger said:

I actually spread marmite on rich tea

I'd spread Marmite on anything in an emergency . 

[S-Westerly]

Marmite? Now that's really a disgusting thing. Bovril I can tolerate but Marmite?