Thanks for the link. The dealer said to "ride it how I wanted to; just change the gears around on the highways." In that case, I guess it wouldn't hurt anything if I rode it like Mr. Moto here recommends... but I'm still researching the subject of engine break-in. Not going to take one admittedly controversial, cheaply designed, exclamation point whore's website as gospel truth applicable to every make and model of engine. I mean—do lubricant companies have anything to lose by recommending earlier oil changes? so why don't they?
Not sure. I've only read about rear reflectors. They appear to just be stickered on with that double-sided foam tape. While I am tempted to just peel them off, they must have been put there for a reason, right? Tiny bit of reflection vs. tiny bit of aero, weight & looks.
Also wondering about those stickers on the tube frame (tire pressures, &c.) probably going to go before I detail it, but not if they're like those cursed airbag warnings they put next to cars' vanity mirrors.
Either way, I'm in no rush to un-stockify the bike.
Edit: Among those stickers is the VIN... somehow I doubt you're supposed to remove them ;o
Respect! The bikers here have been a great influence ever since the RSC days back when I was 15. Now it's time to apply that same respect to/with my own machine.
Birthday gift from a very generous father. He used to work for Lamborghini in Bologna, and thus is a naturalized Ducati enthusiast.
Thanks—I hope I will get to enjoy it for many years!
The exhausts were my least-liked part of the bike when I first set eyes on it, but they are quickly growing on me. Maybe these things just look better in person, or maybe it's a butt only an owner could love.
Just came home from Beverly Hills Ducati with a new pearl white Monster 696. Needless to say, I'm absolutely thrilled. Best feeling bike in the whole store.
I'm glad I wound up with this bike. Very glad and very lucky, as it was a gift! Just the right amount of power, too, and no surprises (except how amazing it sounds in person).
I'm sure many here can relate to my excitement—it's like a new addition to the family—it's my baby! I believe having a bike that I treat like my [expensive] child will keep me safer as well.
And I agree with that sentiment. I said I thought it was a joke, but couldn't help but wonder at it. I never said I believed it or wanted to believe it—merely interested in discussing it (which we are successfully doing).
That's beside the point (e.g. I doubt 9/11 conspiracy theorists find it more comforting to think that their own government would kill innocent people).
I thought this was a joke--especially after 10 minutes of Monty Python-esque rambling about white lumps--but after reading the article, I can't help but wonder: "what if?"
Basically he's arguing that cancer is a fungus (or rather is caused by a fungus), and he has cured it with simple pH-raising baking soda injections, and that cancer is a huge money-maker for the disease-care industry, and doctors and drug companies don’t want to mess with the status quo.
It's actually kind of scary. But wouldn't we always want to believe that the simple truth is being suppressed by rich doctors and drug companies? Nevertheless, I would kind of hope it isn't true, so I don't feel as helpless for not doing anything about it, or maybe so I can keep giving money to cancer "research."
Has anyone heard anything along these lines? has it been debunked? just another conspiracy theory?
Thanks for the advice, obsolum. I like naked bikes better anyway.
There is a Ducati store in Beverly Hills where my old man still works. I discovered that for some reason he is keen on buying me a 696 (better get a few frame sliders with that one)... I guess I can't complain? Well, we'll see what happens.
I actually happen to be in the market for one of these. I've been considering the SV650 for many years (and the 650R for a little less). Any reasons why I shouldn't go with a Ducati 620/695? Unlike the OP, I am licensed and buying a new or used bike within the week (experience is not as much of an issue here—in need of transportation is more like it).
There's a difference between making fun of someone losing a pet and making fun of his posting it on this forum. It was an irony, a satire, a statement, a protest. What's most profound is that you call it spam when you don't call the dog thread spam. Is spam acceptable when it is sincerely written? The worm thread was calling attention to this question.
What bothers me about the glass thing is that half full and half empty imply different situations: half full = the glass used to be empty and is being filled up; half empty = the glass used to be full and is being drained.
RM's thread is (not was) an artistic statement. It is satirical, pointing out how silly it is to post personal stuff as news here. I've always understood the "my --- died" threads. They are just attention-whoring pity parties to make people feel obligated to post their regards.
Would you stand up in the middle of a wedding ceremony and declare to all that your dog just died? Sure, it sucks, but that's no place for it and neither is this: an international setting.
If a man die, instead post a biography. That will give those interested something to read.
Umbrellas are for obnoxious people who are scared of getting a little wet, or don't realize that there are better ways to stay dry. They are also a safety hazard: people injure themselves when they fall because they don't have both hands free, and they reduce visibility. Do they use them in the military? do they use them in the postal service? did Gene Kelly use one? do any other professionals who might end up working in the rain use them? And they tip over all the time.
I still miss kidcodea. I don't know what offense could warrant offending the entire community by painfully extracting a character like that (both times). It's like waking up to see that lerts has been banned.