bad writing in Motorcyclist

Well, thank you Mr. Obvious.....

Well then, you don't have to like jack, or you can if you want, and everybody who doesn't agree with everybody else sucks to someone, so let's all just read what we want and leave the sucking to someone else.

Did I mention that the emperor (ducati) has no clothes?

That was sarcasm jack, and everybody else who worships those kinds of things.....just in case you didn't get it.  

This month it was simple, turn to the jack lewis article, tear it out, and voila! it's a good magazine again.  

I logged on here specifically to give Jack some compliments, and I still intend to.  
Powerzombie, Joe, whoever you are; I would suggest you invite Jack to your workplace to allow him to heckle you for a while.
The guy is doing his job.  While I'm certain Mr. Catterson welcomes constructive feedback your mean and overly lengthy tirade adds no value other than to feed your own ego.  Like others have commented I suggest you vote with your wallet and cancel your subscription and move on.  

I have always been a huge fan of Powerzombie's writing. His insight into the world of Forum posting and literary expertise is beyond reproach. Please keep up the stellar Mr. Zombie, I do so enjoy reading your drivel. BTW - most people who despise a magazine or an author at the level you obviously do would just avoid the offending publication. I, for one, absolutely love your forum work and will look forward to your forthcoming response.  

B-crow-
I don't think Jack would want to heckle me at work...I am a lowly night janitor and he may fall asleep. Having said that, he's always welcome to come on down, grab a mop and clean some bumpiss and vomit!

Mrs.critic-
Thanks for the compliments, it takes a lot of time to do writing of this calibre for free. It means the world to me that you can take the time to not only read it, but respond.

I wouldn't cancel my subscription to this or any other magazine due to an over abundance of Ducatis and Jack Lewis...there are other parts of the magazine for those of you who didn't notice.  

Spamming mandy, meet jack lewis......  

I have an issue [pizz was data pun?] is son of a gun is gunning for info. I have to agree, someone better run the wheels off those is test bikes is do snot nose use the rear brakes! I want a road test! Not a testiclement about how small yours are. zNo, No, I ride day world's is fast test and test the crap out of that slowrider.

Now, ear is my gripe. I warned some out dare that they better get the tech right is correct their azz is pazz them up on the abstract. So, get dis... You want insult to injury is you better gas that factory flub beer rub beer babe bee bug E bump her a little bit better on the juice or cable pull call it; fly of the bike bye wire is the R1's "crank plank gear cross plane her," if you want to under steer stand the technical part of dis post.

Now, CW road the R1 and says the old mode switch was whatever that tech was is questionable. Next was RRW who and I quote: "Unlike other manufacturers who offer mode selector switches that retard the timing to reduce power output...' 'In my experience, mode selector system that retard timing..." Pg. 22~~Roadracing World, March 2009... Is, hold the brakes!

I am going to present to you a very simple design by two engineering teams. One is going to use the mode switch for the air cleaner flapper dapper dan. The other manufacturer is going to work with Mikuni and flap the subthrottles as the mode switch goes from Suzuki using the air cleaner design since 1999. Wear out the tech is to present a zero ignition retard is the press packages explain a whole little of nothing is you better have your facts right on the money is do your research is all I am asking if you are print to read.

Dare-4 or the Big4 is I will now explain a 5 point scenario that the ignition retard is going to fall on my side is an "air retard" and has nothing to do with ignition retard if I remove the flapping system, if retard occurred every stroke is now that mode? You would cook the engine down is full blinking H for your hot bar be blinking big time!

Bikes on the "Air Retard" is linear like ignition or electrics:

1. Mode Switch 2007 Suzuki 1000 = Air cleaner flap open positions are set in the linear opening in speeds of degrees are rpm times yeah, that theory.
2. Hayabusa mode switch ~ Year being the technical. A/Cleaner gate being the retard [AIR] design for the Suzuki line.
3. 2006 ZX-14 has a retard lag at the throttle plate or secondary plate or subthrottle is just technical jargon for the first in command. So, the slight low end air lag was a slow controlled linear move on the air gate = Subthrottles.
4. 2009 ZX-14 receives the same subthrottle action but only a quicker opening of the subthrottle, not advance the ignition? Retard my next ride?
5. 2009 Yamaha R1 receives a mode switch for the air control of the sub-system.

Would you journalist please correct my tech as INN we sit down is you tell me your abstract is explain there is only one way the bike works and that is in the linear is no one messes with retard is maybe, fail-safe/backup/limp mode it to run like poo-per scooper is shove data sheet to me is correct a few magazines in no uncertain terms is get it write, fellas!


I  

....and there you have it folks.  

the best writers seem to show up in ultimate motorcycling mag http://www.ultimatemotorcycling.com/ apparently, they came from the robb report and they can actually afford to pay for professional writers.  

I have been pulling out the back issues and rereading all the Jack Lewis, and everything I can find on the internet, too. Jack has provided a breach in the tent that shields us from the truth, with his wit and literary skills he connects with those educated who can get it. Some cannot; probably the same folks that write alot and don't see the cracks in a motorcycle magazine article where the editor sent it back 5 times to be rewritten only to find reversing negatives added (not unlike, etc.), while looking for this art of insight, illumination of the human motorcycle condition which has me firmly in its grasp.  

I'm out...  

if you do not like motorcyclist mag get a sub to knitting-weekly  

I am going to have to agree with the OP.  In the last several issues things have improved but, compared to the days of Mitch Boehm, things are...questionable.

Now, whether or not you consider Jack's writing in the article in question ostentatious (as I do), is beside the point.  Prior to the last few issues Mr. Catterson's personal preference regarding motorcycles (supersport / off road) permeated almost all aspects of the review process.  The magazine, regardless of which individual rider wrote the review, would *blast* any street bike (especially a cruiser) that did not perform in the manner of the supersports Mr. Catterson preferred.

In other words, Mr. Catterson [seemed] completely unable to grade each and *every* motorcycle in the matter it was designed: mellow distance enjoyment for a cruiser, all-around functionality for a [modern] UJM, racy performance for supersport, flexible utility for a dual-purpose, etc.  Every street bike had to perform a la supersport, every bike that had even a tinge of off-road ability had to perform like an offroad racer.  

It made me...laugh...when I read Brian Catterson's oped in the M109 v Hammer review, 'I can't understand the cruiser form over function...'  Really?  Is Catterson so blind to think that supersports have not, over the past 10 years, ALSO taken some "form over function" traits themselves?  As the highest example of this trait, let us take a simple look at all the proposed supersport prototypes and one-offs from the past 5 years…overdesign, anyone?  Yet overdesign in both theoretical and individual production supersports are accepted but the [bloated] overdesign of the modern chopper scene is ridiculed, only because the supersports can do 150 MPH while carrying said burden?

Now, I must agree that some things have improved: the M109 v Hammer review was significantly less biased than previous cruiser reviews.  I have a feeling that is due to Mr. Catterson's reigning in of his own personal opinions from being interjected into the final results.  The review was a significant improvement versus early last year; the bikes were reviewed for what they *were*, not what they were *not*, and how they performed in the range their designers originally intended when the models were considered.  I was pleased to see a verdict where the 2 bikes up for debate were considered head-to-head, not to some 'theoretical' motorcycle from another class entirely.  Not a single mention of the fact that these cruisers could not corner like a Ducati was to be found…amazing!

Now, you may discount my opinion as coming from an apparent cruiser rider (for I am, currently), but my prior ride was a 1984 Ninja 900.  Before I settled on my current cruiser I also looked at everything from BMW RT to Triumph Spirit ST sport tourers, to Ducati Monster and Moto Guzzis V-twins streetsports, and a number of Japanese streetsport / modern UJMs to sport tourers.  I decided on my current ride, the Kawasaki Mean Streak Limited Edition, as I felt it best fit my body condition and riding needs for the way I am *today*.

So, therefore, I must give kudos to the improved review…but there is still far to go.  As noted, reviewers who both are experienced and *willing* to review a motorcycle within its own design realm and not some fictitious "absolute" across *all* review types is still required.  And, most importantly IMHO, writers who are less interesting in writing in "hip", "trendy" or "grandiose" style simply because they can (removing street lingo, ghetto talk and too-cute euphemisms would be a GREAT start).  They are supposed to be communicating emotional involvement in both the art and experience of motorcycling, not experimenting in a walk through the entirety of Webster's to self-promote one's availability for the Pulitzer.  

Dude, your I.Q has got to be 50 points higher than mine, well said.  

scooternut- do you have the address for the subscriptions dept?