Thu Apr 10 17:48:49 1997 - Message No. 604
From: Phoebus Katsanos

Subject: Re AT- Transalp


 Hi there. Just a little input on an old and very loved friend!
I drove the Transalp for 86.000 km (Yes thats right 86.000 km ) and i thnk
it is trully a grate bike. Now i have the AT for 25.000 km and it is better
in almost all aspects, but Not Really That Better!!!!
The AT has more power, not much though and with a bit more lazy engine and a
few more kilos. So the feeling isnt much different, though the AT is faster.
You will appreciate the more power when ridding with sozia and bags, where
you will find that overtaking cars is a bit more difficult. Also i found
that the manual for the AT wich said that they made the center of weight
lower is defenately tue! The AT is heavyer than the Transalp BUT you really
feel it is the same weight even when you maneuver betwin cars to park it and
it defenately holds better in corners! However, i found that the Transalp
being less stiff gave you better feeling in tight corners with low speeds
and it was easyer to handle off road (this is contradictory to the rule that
sais that a bike has to be stiff to turn well, but i believe that off road
some "elasticity" of the bike is good... ) Ofcourse the loosness of the
Transalp is VERY bad when you take a fst turn in asfalt! On the other hand
it feels better to drive fast the Transalp because of the motor wich likes
hi rpms and makes it easyer to either throttle to 7000 - 80000 rpms to
accelerate or to gear down to the same rpms to slow down in a corner. This
gives you a feeling of driving really fast. Of course you can defenately do
all those things with the AT and do them even better, but it seems to me
that the engine acts a bit more lazy and in comparison it feels like it
doesnt want you to push it to the limmit. On the other hand, driving on the
AT with 3 cases full of stuff and your girlfriend uphill with only 3.000 -
4.000 rpms is a perfect feeling and you cant get this with the Transalp wich
is almost dead below 3.000 rpms and it really comes to life after 4.500 rpms.
To conclude: The AT is a bettrer bike.
Its got better brakes, a stronger engine, it is more comfortable and can
make faster trips. I also believe that it handles good ofroad maby as good
as the Transalp. The Transalp on the other hand is lighter, and i believe it
feels better ofroad.
I have to say that i believe you can go anywhere there is even a suspicion
of road with those two bikes, as long as you will not have to turn the bike
arround in a very tight place and as long as you dont find any really loose
MUD or any SNOW! There you defenately need a lighter bike!

Ps I consider the AT a better bike than all others in its price and category
and the Transalp the best in the 500 - 650 cc range. It is not by chance
that Honda hasnt really changed theese bikes i think since 86 for the
Transalp and 90 for the AT.
Also i think that the saying "no substitute for cubic centimiters" is a joke
for the Japannese bike and car industry and i think it is rediculus to talk
about a "1.000 cc - 60 hp 230 kg close to the ground on-off bike"
----------------------------Phoebus Katsanos-------------------------------
--------------------------pktsan@med.auth.gr.----------------------------



|------------------------------------------------------|
| This mail was posted on the Africa Twin Mailing List |
|      More info at: http://home.pages.de/~atic/       |
|------------------------------------------------------|

dipper@normans.isd.uni-stuttgart.de