Well I'll jump in this thread cause I've watched JJ from back in the day and currently watch fast n loud.
From a talent standpoint, nobody touches JJ
Call me a dick rider, I don't care, but coming from a young and inspiring hot rod builder wanna be and bike builder wannabe, I look up to craftsmen like JJ.
Im a big fan of JJ fabrication skills. If I suddenly became independantly wealthy, my path would probably be a lot similar to his. Id aquire a lot of the tools he did, learn from a lot of the people he did, and setup a shop like he has with Austin Speed Shop. Just cuz he may or may not be an asshole in real life doesnt mean shit to me. I just like to see poeple work metal,
Watching a show about some prick forging, welding and building stuff is better then watching SOA or anything else ANY DAY.
I can name better builders that Jesse, even though I admire his skill.
No I'm just speaking in terms of the rest of the "builders" in the build off. I agree that there is a good amount of skilled fabricators besides him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadRiverMoCo
The builders working with Jesse are better bike builders than Jesse. All this "craftsman" bullshit is just that: bullshit. A gold plated turd is still a turd. Artistry is the blend of vision and craft. Taste is an important skill, more important than one's building ability. Cole Foster has unparalleled skills, but it isn't his skill that makes him Cole Foster. It's his vision, his taste. Jesse has become Perewitz/Ness: a tasteless trendhumper trading off a glory long since past.
I DEFINITELY agree, I've never been a fan of JJ bikes, he's built a few cool ones, but the big, stretched, chromed out trash sucks. I don't like his taste in bikes, but I'm speaking on his skills.
Cole foster is definitely one of the best builders and probably has the best taste of most. Ive always loved coles style, his mooneyes bike he built for te show in yokohama is unbelieveable. I just don't think cole has the skills of Jesse. I think one thing that sets JJ aparts is the blacksmithing. I think blacksmith work is cool as shit.
No I'm just speaking in terms of the rest of the "builders" in the build off. I agree that there is a good amount of skilled fabricators besides him.
I DEFINITELY agree, I've never been a fan of JJ bikes, he's built a few cool ones, but the big, stretched, chromed out trash sucks. I don't like his taste in bikes, but I'm speaking on his skills.
Cole foster is definitely one of the best builders and probably has the best taste of most. Ive always loved coles style, his mooneyes bike he built for te show in yokohama is unbelieveable. I just don't think cole has the skills of Jesse. I think one thing that sets JJ aparts is the blacksmithing. I think blacksmith work is cool as shit.
Actually, in their time and place, WCC bikes are quite rad. When that dude from fast and furious (friends with Conrad and Paul Cox) rolled up to the Invitational on a WCC bike, it was hard not to be impressed by the vision and execution of that machine - it wasn;'t my taste but it was beautiful - the problem I have is the world has changed/moved on/progressed/evolved and JJ hasn't. So despite his talents, skills and bankroll, I don't really care to see another repeat performance of a repeat performance...
Actually, in their time and place, WCC bikes are quite rad. When that dude from fast and furious (friends with Conrad and Paul Cox) rolled up to the Invitational on a WCC bike, it was hard not to be impressed by the vision and execution of that machine - it wasn;'t my taste but it was beautiful - the problem I have is the world has changed/moved on/progressed/evolved and JJ hasn't. So despite his talents, skills and bankroll, I don't really care to see another repeat performance of a repeat performance...
Oh yeah they built some awesome bikes, but still not my taste. I hate the big dog, OCC trash. Too much bling, stretch, and rake.
I don't get the whole blacksmith thing. I mean it's great if you're making horse shoes, buckboards or suits of armor but on a motorcycle it just screams, "I'm trying sooo hard to be different and go where no man has gone before."
Whether or not that took the skills of 100 Chinamen railroad workers is irrelevant to the fact that it's not a bike you could ride.
Which should be the metric for how bikes are judged.
Motorcycles can be art in their beauty and functionality. But if you try to make it art from the start, it just comes off as trying too hard. My opinion, obviously...
Which is why every corporation that commissioned an OCC bike has it displayed in a lobby and not being ridden to and from the office.
If I see a dude riding/camping with a Pan, knuckle, or any other 60ish year old bike that gets all my respect.
I understand that bike. I guess. But I'd rather have a bike I could ride on a camping trip.
Whether or not that took the skills of 100 Chinamen railroad workers is irrelevant to the fact that it's not a bike you could ride.
Which should be the metric for how bikes are judged.
Motorcycles can be art in their beauty and functionality. But if you try to make it art from the start, it just comes off as trying too hard. My opinion, obviously...
Which is why every corporation that commissioned an OCC bike has it displayed in a lobby and not being ridden to and from the office.
If I see a dude riding/camping with a Pan, knuckle, or any other 60ish year old bike that gets all my respect.
I understand that bike. I guess. But I'd rather have a bike I could ride on a camping trip.
Dig it.
But you could argue that if bikes should be judged on how rideable they are, a 60 year old pan or knuckle ain't going to win any awards, since you'll spend equal time working on it as riding. Some will argue they can be just as reliable, but in this day and age, you ride a pan or a knuckle because you WANT to ride a pan or knuckle, not because they're the best choice for reliability or rideability.
The way I look at it, it's all in the intended purpose. If you want something that you can hop on, fire up, and ride anywhere with no problems, you should judge the comfort, functionality, reliability, and overall user friendliness of that bike.
Now if it's something for bar hopping or just pissing on dudes with stock Harleys, it needs to look killer, sound like a caged animal, and be something you'd never consider taking on the interstate.
Is it douchey to want a bike that looks cool first, and is functional second? Well, as it's been said before, most of us are making sacrifices to function for looks here on Chop Cult. Why else would you deal with shit flying up in your face because you don't run a front fender, or ripped up jeans because your belt drive is exposed? Because it just looks cooler.
Not all bikes are created equal, so they can't be judged as such. There's room for both, and personally, I aspire to have (at least) one of each. The way I see it, build your bike however YOU want it. If you build it for you and people just happen to dig it, awesome. If you build it in the hopes of impressing people, that's lame.
But what the fuck, I'm just some dude on the internet.
But you could argue that if bikes should be judged on how rideable they are, a 60 year old pan or knuckle ain't going to win any awards, since you'll spend equal time working on it as riding. Some will argue they can be just as reliable, but in this day and age, you ride a pan or a knuckle because you WANT to ride a pan or knuckle, not because they're the best choice for reliability or rideability.
The way I look at it, it's all in the intended purpose. If you want something that you can hop on, fire up, and ride anywhere with no problems, you should judge the comfort, functionality, reliability, and overall user friendliness of that bike.
Now if it's something for bar hopping or just pissing on dudes with stock Harleys, it needs to look killer, sound like a caged animal, and be something you'd never consider taking on the interstate.
Is it douchey to want a bike that looks cool first, and is functional second? Well, as it's been said before, most of us are making sacrifices to function for looks here on Chop Cult. Why else would you deal with shit flying up in your face because you don't run a front fender, or ripped up jeans because your belt drive is exposed? Because it just looks cooler.
Not all bikes are created equal, so they can't be judged as such. There's room for both, and personally, I aspire to have (at least) one of each. The way I see it, build your bike however YOU want it. If you build it for you and people just happen to dig it, awesome. If you build it in the hopes of impressing people, that's lame.
But what the fuck, I'm just some dude on the internet.
My bike's ages are as follows. 63, 54, 45, years old.
They are as reliable as can be once shaken down. My oldest bike is the one I ride the most. Sure some stuff rattles loose, and it requires general maintenance more often. But to me, that's a much more worthwhile effort. I'll spend time keeping long forgotten relics on the road and I feel better for it. The ride to wrench ratio is heavily skewed to the riding side of the spectrum.
You just don't throw these things away because the technology has long been eclipsed.
Sure aesthetics plays a huge role. My factory rigid bike handles amazing and is predictable in turns. I weave through traffic fast enough to pass gun-shy street bikes riding the carpool lines.
My long chop with a 12 over fork and king and queen seat is more comfortable than a first class cabin on the Titanic. Laid back with some 6 bend bars.. I could sleep-ride on that bitch.
The bike in the link, I would assume, rides like 2 dudes fucking each other with a barbed wire canoe and they forgot the lube.
AND P.S. we're not just dudes on the internet. We're much more important than that.
Linear Mode
