Feature Story
1st Feature
WINGIN' IT
Story and photos by Tom Van Beveren
The first Wing I ever saw belonged to my father. He had traded a very expensive Bianchi ten-speed bicycle that he kept in the master bedroom for it and, although it was a used motorcycle, he babied it like it was new.
I remember the jet-black paint work,  the chrome valve covers and the twin exhaust pipes gleaming in the sunlight the day he brought it home. My Dad, always a Brit-bike lover at heart, had finally traded into the big leagues with the Honda and I could see the joy in his eyes every time he rolled out of the driveway on it.
My father died a few years after he got the Honda but, before he did, he was able to put quite a few happy miles on the bike. I don’t think he ever got my Mom to ride on the back seat but she understood the importance that motorcycles had for my Dad and put up with the occasional Saturday disappearance after my uncle showed up for a morning ride. I envied my Dad, getting away from it all like that. You might even say that that Gold Wing was responsible for my love of motorcycles.
 Since 1973, Honda has been producing what could well be called the king of the road for two-up, transcontinental, two-wheeled transportation. With a tubular-steel chassis, a dummy fuel tank concealing some of the electrics, a kick-start lever (yes, really), and storage space, the original GL was devoid of most items considered essential by today’s Wing riders. There were no saddlebags attached to a stock Wing back then, but riders kept adding them so they could go the distance. There was no fairing, either, although Dad, like so many others, fit a Windjammer fairing to his.
Honda saw what the buying public was doing to its Wing and starting adding the bits and pieces the public wanted as standard equipment. The then-basic, flat four’s 1,000 cc displacement increased, and two additional cylinders were added along the way as well, until, today, the all-gussied-up GL 1800 Gold Wing is the epitome of touring comfort and efficiency.
2nd Feature
OUTLANDISH BOHMERLAND
Photos by Tom Van Beveren
Think you’ve seen every-thing there is to see on two wheels? Think again.
Meet the Bohmerland, a super-long-wheelbase machine that surely qualifies as one of the strangest motorcycles ever made.
The Bohmerland was  built from around 1926 until 1939, and it was the first motorcycle manufactured in Czechoslovakia. The Czech Republic? What about CZ motorcycles? The better known of the Czech Republic two-wheelers, CZ began production in 1932 and it gained its renown from racing, which was something the Bohmerland was not designed for and didn’t get into.
So what was this strange machine designed for? Well, strangely enough, it was not designed to be a motorcycle. When the Bohmerland’s designer, Albin Liebisch, put pen to paper, he was looking to create a “people carrier.” That explains the ultra-long seat, which was designed to carry three or four people, and the fact that most of the machines came equipped with a sidecar, which gave them more people-moving capacity than most of today’s mid-sized sedans.
Prior to WW II, Czechoslovakia was not exactly an industrial giant, nor did it have any significant technological inventions or whiz-bang engineering to throw at the endeavor. Judging by the design, neither did Liebisch. This is, frankly, a pretty rudimentary machine without any design points of great interest, but it is unique enough, old enough and rare enough to capture the interest of those who are into the slightly bizarre.
For more on this story, pick up a current issue of FREE 2 WHEEL at your local dealer, or use the handy order form page found on our web site.
Ask the Sergeant:
On a recent ride with a dozen buddies, one of our group passed the rest of us on a straight section of road, just going from the back of the group to the front. It was unfortunate that he just happened to do so in an area that is heavily patrolled and, according to the officer who eventually wrote him the ticket, a location that is targeted for extra patrol due to a federal grant.
My question is how was the officer able to identify his speed distinct from the rest of us? All of us were riding in a tight group and my friend only sped up for a brief moment and was still close enough to the group that we can’t figure out how the officer managed to pick him out of the background.
Andrew Yardley,
Chino Hills
This is a very common question that gets expressed in many different ways. “How do you know it was me who was speeding?” or “How can you be sure it was me and not that (mysterious and nonexistent) car that looked just like mine?”
In California, speed is measured legally in one of two ways. The first is the traditional method of “pacing” a vehicle by matching the officer’s speed to the violator’s speed. The certified speedometer in the officer’s vehicle is then used to verify the violator’s speed. This is a tried-and-true method and in court it is nearly impossible to defeat. This method does not require the officer to show sup-porting documents for roadway surveys and does not require specific training because anyone has the ability to do it. All the officer has to do is state why he felt the speed was unsafe and, if the Judge agrees, you’re guilty.
The second method used to measure speed in California is by using RADAR and, now, increasingly, the standard is becoming LIDAR. Both systems use a similar technology but a different medium to verify the speed of the violator. Engineers spend a lifetime coming up with formulas to explain how these devices work and self-diagnostic features to verify the condition of the internal electronic components. As officers, we spend days learning those same formulas and practices to test the devices to verify that they are working as the engineers designed them to work. All this allows us to qualify as experts in court so we can use the devices in the field. But, just like the TV at home, all you really need to know is that, if you point the remote at the device and push the power button, it should work. If not, something’s wrong!
The principle of LIDAR (and RADAR) is really quite simple. Each device emits a beam of either radio wave (RADAR) or focus light (LIDAR) at a known and steady wavelength. That beam is positioned on the target and reflected back to its source. The movement of the target, relative to the source, com-presses or expands the wavelength of the original beam giving it a new wavelength as it is returned by reflection to the device. The device does simple calculations on the new beam to figure out the change in wavelength and the difference is the speed of the target.
In RADAR, this is where the trouble starts. RADAR emits a beam that is approximately 21 feet wide for every 100 feet of distance traveled between the source and the target. Within that distance, other vehicles can interfere with the signal and cause false readings or even keep the target from being picked up on the RADAR. RADAR has a tendency to search for the largest, fastest, and/or closest target because of the nature of that “fishing net” sized beam.
LIDAR, on the other hand, is a scalpel. The beam emitted from a LIDAR is approximately two inches wide for every 100 feet of distance to the target. Using a “focused beam of light” (a laser), the officer can be very specific in what target he is aiming for and, by using the sights on the device, pick and choose which target he is measuring. LIDAR also gives positive clues in verifying the speed by stating whether or not the target was approaching or going away from the source and by stating at what distance the last measurement was taken. These features are rapidly making it the method of choice in courtrooms around the country. Some LIDAR devices are even equipped with a camera that can download a picture showing the time, date, distance and speed, and the devices targeting reticule on the violator’s vehicle. How’s that for “are you sure it was me?”
LIDAR and RADAR require more proof in court both to use and to obtain a conviction. California law requires that the section of roadway you’re using the device on be surveyed by engineers to support the posted speed limit unless you are using it for enforcing an absolute speed limit such as 25 miles per hour on residential streets, 65 miles per hour on the freeway, or in school zones. Additionally, minimum training and testing standards for the officer must exist and every use of the device must first be based on a trained estimation of the violator’s speed. The device is then used to verify that estimation.
It is required that the devices themselves be sent out for certification by the agency that uses them to an independent laboratory and, believe it or not, the officer must be in full uniform and on or in a marked enforcement vehicle while he is using the device (unless he is on foot, but then it’s too hard to chase someone). All of these points must be proven by the officer in court to eliminate the idea that the use of LIDAR or RADAR was conducted so as to create a “speed trap,” which I know has been explained here by my predecessor on several occasions.
Each type of system has advantages and disadvantages. RADAR, for example, can be used in a moving mode that LIDAR cannot. Environmental objects, such as trees in a center divider, or fog and mist, affect RADAR less because LIDAR, while it has pinpoint accuracy, requires an unobstructed line of sight. As stated above, LIDAR can also provide distance measurements. The distance feature is helpful at accident scenes when officers need to measure roadways and points of evidence and their locations.
So, to answer your question, the officer most likely used LIDAR. Your buddy was caught by the latest in technology--technology that allowed him to be individually selected out of a group. Motorcyclists now need to remember that some of the old tactics, like hugging close to trucks and campers, don’t work any more. LIDAR will target the object selected and only the selected object, without the “fishing net” effect of the past.
Ride safe, keep smiling, and take care of yourselves and each other out there.
For more on this story, pick up a current issue of FREE 2 WHEEL at your local dealer, or use the handy order form page found on our web site.
|
Scuttle Putt:
BMW Motorcycles has joined forces with “2 Wheel Passport,” a new television travel series that will take viewers to scenic destinations across the United States on a motorcycle. As part of the agreement, BMW will sponsor three episodes of the show’s first season--the Yosemite National Park episode to Northern California, the Tail of the Dragon episode to North Carolina, and the Bonneville episode through Northern Utah. BMW will also be providing three bikes for the show’s hosts to ride, including the G650, F800, and the K12R-Sport.
“A recent study has shown that BMW owners are amongst the earliest adopters of new technology and media,” said Raine Devries, Producer of “2 Wheel Passport.” “As ‘2 Wheel Passport’ was designed to incorporate many tech advancements, including downloading our routes to GPS’s and portions of the episodes to portable download devices, we welcome BMW Motorcycles’ involvement with the series as we feel they share our vision for providing the components most desired by today’s bikers.”
INTERVIEW:
TWO WHEELED TERROR
Story by Anne Van Beveren
Photos courtesy of Glen Heggstad
What’s the worst thing that ever happened to  you on a motorcycle ride? Flat tire in August, 20 miles from Middle-of-Nowhere, Arizona? Booking snafu that left you hotel challenged in mid-winter Durango? Hard luggage that bailed at high speed? Key that got lost? Bike that got stolen?
Whatever it was, your worst experience on a motorcycle pales next to being snatched off your bike by AK-47 toting guerillas in Colombia and held hostage for five weeks, tied to a tree or being force marched through the mountains, with only a couple of bowls of rice a day to sustain you and the ever-present threat of a life-ending bullet to the brain.
That worst experience was suffered by Glen Heggstad, who described his terrifying ordeal in a book called “Two Wheels Through Terror.” It’s an experience that will make your blood run cold and make you wonder if you could’ve survived with your sanity intact. But it’s not an experience that stopped Heggstad riding. The minute his captors  let him loose, he got back on a bike and kept right on riding--all the way down to the tip of South America, back up the eastern side, and then through Central America and Mexico back to Southern California. Now, six years later, he’s still exploring the emerging nations of the planet on two wheels.
“I was always a traveler. I remember reading Jack Kerouac’s novel “On The Road” when I was in high school. I shut the book and, the very next day, I stuck out my thumb and started hitch hiking for New Orleans,” said Heggstad.
Born and raised in the San Francisco bay area, Heggstad had always been a motorcycle fan, too.
For more on this story, pick up a current issue of FREE 2 WHEEL at your local dealer, or use the handy order form page found on our web site.
SWISS MISS
Story and photos by Reid Libby
In spite of what the title might proclaim, those horizontally opposed cylinders are obviously the trademark of a goodly number of hard working Bavarian elves.
While there is always an outside  chance that those in the Free 2 Wheel topographical department might have misread their globe, this is (mercifully for them) not one of those times. Origins aside, this month’s feature motorcycle has spent 18 years of its life sheltered away in the small, but significant, land of Switzerland. Stuck in neutral, one might say. But, thanks to enthusiast extraordinaire Brian Dietz, this beautiful 1983 Magni MB2 has been snatched from the grip of those numbing Alpine winters and now basks in sunny Santa Monica.
Looking at the BMW models offered in recent years, no one could say that their designers are afraid to push the envelope when it comes to styling. Just look at the Rockster or the 650CS. BMW is certainly not following anybody’s lead and its designers aren’t afraid to try something different. Flash back to the ’70’s, however,  and you will find that this wasn’t always the case. Many of BMW’s models were as milque-toast bland as Japanese offerings were Wurlitzer garish.
While there is something to be said for evolution over revolution, there were some Bimmerophiles who felt that the transition was taking way too long. As it turns out, Arturo Magni blended the best traits from two outstanding but very distinct motorcycling cultures and created a machine that, for some, was the perfect combination of form and function.
For more on this story, pick up a current issue of FREE 2 WHEEL at your local dealer, or use the handy order form page found on our web site.
|
