Sonny Barger - Hell's Angel

One of the books I read on holiday recently was "Hell's Angel" - the life story of Sonny Barger. For those that don't know who Sonny Barger is, he was the leader / founder of the original Oakland Hell’s Angels in Southern California and was instrumental in establishing the movement in the late 50s and early 60s.

Knowing virtually nothing about the origins of the Hell's Angels (but assuming lots from the legend that has built up around the movement), I was keen to find out a bit more. After a bit of an iffy start (it takes a while to get used to the conversational style of the writing), it actually turned into quite a good read - even if the outlaw lifestyle is not one that I would choose for myself. Overall, the book did little to dispel any of the myths surrounding the club - anyone expecting tales of brotherhood, biker gang fights (and deaths), drug taking, law-breaking and hell-raising won't be disappointed. It is packed with those sorts of stories and doesn't pull any punches. It is undeniable that Sonny Barger has, shall we say, "lived the life".     

However, for me one of the most interesting aspects of the book was the one that was least discussed - the role played by Barger's long-term squeeze, Sharon. This was a girl he met at the age of just 18 - a teen prom queen from a middle-class family with a promising modelling career ahead of her.

However, within a few years she had turned into a fully-fledged Angels' "Old Lady", riding bikes, doing drugs, running up a string of felonies, a bit of gun and drug-running, and generally hanging with an organisation that was to all intents and purposes a criminal one. She also played a central role in the many campaigns to get Sonny Barger released from his various jail terms (notably in the landmark RICO trial in the 70s).

One might assume that a grateful Barger would be in her debt and forever thankful for her unstinting efforts on his (and the movement's) behalf. So how did she end up? Well this is the interesting thing - it seems that after fully 28 years with Barger, when he eventually gets out of slam and made a recovery from throat cancer, she had by then developed a big speed habit which he could not deal with and so he packs her off to rehab - and while out of the way he moves her friend in to take her place. We are then told that they go their separate ways - all in the space of a few sentences. The explanation about what happened here is all very unsatisfactory but it does reflect the fact that Sonny Barger comes across as quite vindictive, self-absorbed and more than a bit of a bully. The book is a pretty joyless read and requires a certain amount of commitment to get through as Barger does tend to write with his fists. But then he is that kind of a man and offers no apologies....

Nevertheless, it's Sharon's story that I'm interested in - yet I can find virtually nothing about her. She doesn't appear to have written any books or given any account of her time with Barger and the Angels and a Google search turns up very little that isn't about Sonny. I find it interesting how a life can change so quickly - one minute, she's an attractive young prom queen with her life ahead of her, the next, due to Barger's influence, her life has taken a very different turn and she ends up discarded by the man she gave nearly three decades (and a lot of effort) to.

She apparently stayed in the Southern California area (Orange County) and I would be interested to know more about her story – so does anybody know what became of her?

State-sponsored extortion - the rising cost of biking

Today represents an unwelcome landmark. A red letter day for all the wrong reasons. With only the prospect to look forward to of things getting worse in the future. Of course, I knew it was coming - it was just a matter of when. But that sense of nervous anticipation doesn't lessen the impact when the barrier is finally broken. Yes readers, when filling the bike up this morning, for the first time ever I received no change at all in return for the crisp £20 note I proferred to the attendant. No change whatsoever from £20 - zilch..... rien..... nichts..... nada.....

In return, I received the princely sum of 14.40 litres (3.17 gallons) of unleaded fuel, at a cost of 139.0p per litre (that's USD $2.26 per liter for our cousins over the pond) - or £6.31 ($10.28) per gallon in olden speak. And that's not even the most expensive service station I've seen recently (anywhere between 140.0p - 145.0p is the norm where I live). Surely, something is not right here?

The arguments about fuel pricing in the UK are well-rehearsed. Everyone is up in arms over them and in years gone by (when petrol originally hit £5 per gallon - oh to have those days back!) we've even seen country-wide protests and lorry blockades of petroleum plants. So what has changed in recent times to revert us to the normal British fashion of grumbling away about things but doing precisely.....nothing? More importantly, for the subject matter of this blog, at what point does biking become uneconomical?

British drivers pay two taxes on the petrol they buy at the pump - VAT (currently 20%) is charged on top of the cost of fuel and the levied fuel duty. Now, any way you slice it, this is inherently unfair - with other goods, VAT is charged on the actual cost of the goods, not the goods plus an additional levied duty. In total, nearly 65% of the cost of a litre of fuel is made up of fuel tax and VAT. In contrast, forecourt profit accounts for about 5% (with the rest taken up by the cost of refining and transportation). Extrapolate that out to take account of all the petrol that is used daily in the UK and you can start to see how much of a cash-cow this is for the Government. And, having got to this point, and considering the financial mess the country is (allegedly) in, they cannot afford to reduce such a huge and regular guaranteed source of income.

Why do we accept it? There would be uproar in America if they had to pay our prices and more than likely the Government would fall. Why are the British such a soft touch? Repeating the message over and over doesn't make it true but is it the case that having "we're living beyond our means" and "we're all in this together" drummed into us incessently over the last year or so, and having seen the futility of protest in other areas - tuition fees, cuts to public services etc - that perhaps the UK driving population is simply resigned to its fate? I can think of no other explanation. WE WILL COMPLY. Wat Tyler must be turning in his grave.... 

Returning to what all this means means for biking, well, I guess that depends on income and what your raison d'etre for biking actually is. Those for whom biking is a hobby to be enjoyed in spare time may use their bikes a bit less. Maybe one less track day or weekend away. For commuters, certainly in London we have not (yet) hit the levels that would mean biking is more expensive than public transport, but for those outside the metropolis I guess that would depend on where you live. Then again, add the cost of a years servicing, tyres, kit, road tax, wear and tear etc and the difference may well be marginal. Downsizing may become a live option for many people. Or simply give up and return to the daily trudge to the local train/tube station like all the other silent automatons that file into Central London each day. What a prospect.

 

Personally, I find London transport a miserable, expensive, unhealthy, time-consuming and thoroughly unenjoyable experience. The grin factor that I get from being on a bike (even on the commute) is, for me priceless and after all these years I simply could not go back. What say you?

Fear and loathing in London

Cyclists are a funny bunch. Pretty much every road user has an opinion on them and most are not particularly complimentary. Strangely enough, for someone of fairly definite opinions on a range of matters, I'm not entirely sure where I'm going to go with this piece. I've been thinking about doing the typical "venting my spleen" on the menace of London cyclists - especially since a lot of them seem to have a pathological dislike of bikers - but that's a bit predictable and, actually, I think there are wider problems at play here.

Let's get the moans out of the way first. Some of the London cyclists I come across on my commute into town really have to be seen to be believed. It amazes me the number of times I’ve watched cyclists just pull out into the road around buses, cars, vans etc without even so much as a glance backwards to see what else is going on. And many will use their mobiles or wear headphones, thus rendering them not only blind but also deaf (and stupid) – so is it any wonder so many cyclists get knocked off their bikes? Their general aggressiveness and sense of entitlement also grates - just the other night riding through Clapham I saw a cyclist scream at a young lady with a pushchair and a toddler who had the temerity to cross over a pedestrian crossing on the green man whilst he was trying to get home. With dangerous cycling currently in the news, the guy the other night possibly wasn't the sharpest tool in the box but thankfully an injury was averted on this occasion.

But is this the whole story? Of course not. For all the time that they fanny about and get in my way and on my bloody nerves, as much as they exhibit dubious road sense and often an appalling disregard for other road users, I have to acknowledge that cycling in London is about as dangerous as it gets as a way of getting from A to B. I even tried it myself once - in a laughably brief attempt to get a bit fitter a few years ago, I decided that I would buy a bike and cycle into work a couple of times a week. Oh yes, I could see the new me - fitter than a fit thing, 32" waist, legs like a Greek God. It was a great idea. What could possibly go wrong? Well, being a biker, I am of course used to being a second-class citizen on our roads but I quickly found that cycling in London is different gravy entirely. It is so dangerous. I did it once and that was it. The bike was sold soon after and I went back to my Arfur Mullard lifestyle.

Don't get me wrong, I totally get the fitness and fresh air arguments, just as I'd agree that public transport is expensive, unhealthy and more than a bit rubbish but really, seeing what London's roads are like, and experiencing the vulnerability for myself, I struggle to understand why anyone would willingly cycle in London - especially during rush hour. Cyclists need to be "assertive" just to stay alive - and really, in both numbers and the riskiness of their behaviour, they pale into insignificance beside car/van/taxi etc drivers. Running red lights? In the course of my 35-minute ride to work I see at least 20 cars do it, every journey. Driving while using a mobile? Too many even to count. Blocking box junctions? Pretty much every junction, without fail. Not bothering to signal? Par for the course. Pull into a main street without stopping or looking? Happens all the time. The difference is that when a cyclist (or indeed a biker) performs any kind of illegal manoeuvre, they rarely endanger anyone except themselves.

But what really puzzles me is the general attitude that many cyclists have towards bikers, when really we should be on the same side. Why is it that cyclists constantly try to create a “them and us” battleground? Since January 2009, an experimental scheme has been in operation in London, allowing motorcyclists to use bus lanes. Naturally, and somewhat predictably, cyclists’ groups complained, because they didn’t want to share their “special lane” with bikers. But by and large, the scheme has worked - at least for those of us on two wheels.

What hasn't worked so well, in my opinion, is the amount of traffic that is nowadays allowed to inhabit a bus lane. We now have buses, taxis, mini cabs, bicycles and motorbikes all jostling for the same space. Given that the original idea of bus lanes was to make public transport flow faster and therefore be a more attractive (and green) option for people who would normally just jump in their car to go somewhere, the extension to other road users has actually had the opposite effect at busy times of the day. And it contributes to inconsistent (and sometime downright dangerous) driving by encouraging people to nip in and out of the lane as they require to make progress (and to be fair the aggressive, chavvy vermin that race around on scooters and mopeds are a prime cause of this). So, although I enjoy the freedom to use bus lanes myself, I do have some sympathy for bus drivers, who must tear their hair out at some of the stuff that goes on in front of and around them.  

So, what is the answer to London's traffic problems? I wish I knew. What I do know is this: until the OB crack down hard on drivers' routine disregard for the law - and I mean hard, with thousands of fines and disqualifications across this city - then London's roads will not get any safer. Because drivers are the ones making the roads a deathtrap - not those of us on two wheels.

The strange case of the lesser-spotted 750

Where have all the 750s gone? As Toyah might say – “it’s a mithterwy”.

At one time, the three-quarter litre class ruled supreme. So how did we get to the point where the Suzuki GSX-R is the only frontline 750cc sportsbike available? Is there still a case to be made for the 750cc class of bike? Let us examine the evidence…

I can think of only three 750cc machines that are available from new in showrooms today:

Suzuki GSX-R750
Aprillia Shiver 750
Kawasaki Z750
(You could also make a case for the 781cc VFR800)

Of these, the Aprilia and Kwak are naked bikes and the VFR is basically a bored-out 750 sports tourer. Suzuki stands alone among the major manufacturers in still making a 750 sportsbike and the mid-range Gixxer nowadays operates in the strange hinterland that exists between the cut-throat 600 and litre classes.

When I started playing silly beggers on two wheels back in the early-mid 80s, a 750 was THE bike to have. A mate of mine had a black GSX750 and, with me at the time on my 125, I thought it was beautiful – it had a lovely engine and decent power (for the time). 1000 and 1100cc machines may have produced more power but they were also much heavier than a mid-range 750 and didn’t handle as well. The 600 class didn’t really exist at that point. So what has happened in the years since? Why is a popular class of bike now all but extinct? I think the answer lies in the denominations that exist in race series - right now, there is no big ticket race series for the 750 class and there hasn’t been for a while. So it seems to me to be the case that manufacturers are choosing not to make a bike that doesn't sell well because there is no race class for it. Thus, the punters get what they are given.

Back in the real world, you could make a decent case for a 750 machine being perfect for the street. For all the comparisons made in the bike magazines of peak horsepower and peak torque numbers, we ignore the idea of just how much of that power is actually useable. What everyday riders are interested in isn't peak horsepower, but flatter, smoother torque curves - resulting in a much larger powerband. It's what makes the R1 (for example) such a poor choice for a streetbike. You've got a lot of power up top but you have to constantly work the gears to keep it there and so seldom can you use all it has to offer.

These days, 600s are pretty powerful and 1000s so small and light that there’s not much need for an in betweeny. Take Honda as an example - would a CBR750RR succeed in between the 600 and 1000 versions? I doubt it. Suzuki can surely only persist with theirs due to the fact that they have no competition. But very few riders are looking specifically for a 750 it seems. Times have changed and, sadly, without a headline 750 class race series, I think that from a marketing and desirability standpoint they are dead.

Elementary my Dear Watson….

The day 10,000 bikes descended on Wootton Bassett

Yesterday was a momentus day.

The Ride of Respect is the biking communities’ way of acknowledging the sacrifices made by our troops but also the people of Wootton Bassett and surrounding areas who line the streets and pay their respects every time a repatriation takes place. In a sense, they do this on the nation’s behalf so yesterday was about acknowledging that. This was payback time.

The day itself started with the trip down the M4 from London. This is normally a boring old schlep, but not yesterday. Bike after bike after bike after bike was travelling westwards – a whole movement was on the move. Many were adorned with flags and banners and the obligatory nods, waves, leg extensions etc were made to acknowledge fellow riders. The day felt good.

Bikers are generally a pretty patriotic bunch - each had their own reasons for giving up their time to do this but those reasons don’t need to be discussed. It is what it is and that’s accepted. Anyway, after a short pit-stop at Membury and a meet up with some pals, it was onto the ride starting point at Hullavington Airfield – and what a sight to behold this was. It looked like an army was mobilizing. There were hundreds upon hundreds of bikes of all shapes and sizes - a real show of force. Take a look:

Hullavington Airfield
Moving into position
Let the thunder roll!!! 

If truth be told there was quite a lot of hanging around before the off but the roads to Wootton Bassett are small and windy so a free-for-all was never going to be allowed to happen. Instead, we were let go in batches of a few hundred at a time so this took some time to organize. But it didn’t matter - the atmosphere was great and there was a lot of machinery to look at and admire. Thankfully, the threatened rain didn’t arrive.

The ride itself was what made the day special. The route we took to Wootton was around 16 miles or so and there were people lining the road all the way in. Houses were decked out with flags and bunting and they clapped and waved us through. We reciprocated by hooting, revving engines and high-fiving people as we rode slowly past. Kids in particular were loving it (which bodes well for the future of biking) - this was a very special atmosphere. Of course, these are people who are often sneeringly referred to by the Islington set as “little Englanders” or, horror of horrors, “Daily Mail readers”. The truth however is that they are simply patriotic, respectful and proud – and thankfully, in this miserably politically-correct age of ours, they are not afraid to show it.

Wootton Bassett, when we arrived was packed – and basked in sunshine. Remember that the first bikes had gone out at 9.00am and we were arriving at just past 1.00pm. Yet the enthusiasm with which we were received was palpable and absolutely genuine (although by this time the pubs were open so maybe that helped!). It was a slow crawl through the town – at one point I actually stopped the bike to gently “high-five” a little tot who was being held in her dad’s arms. She beamed with pleasure – another little tick against the reputation of the biking fraternity, I hope. And then it was over - all too quickly in fact.

Overall, I was very proud to have been a part of the event and I know the people I was with felt the same. The organisers, marshals and everybody involved in putting the event on deserve great credit. What will stay with me is the camaraderie amongst the biking community and the warmth of the people of Wootton Bassett. Here’s a little bit of video footage of the ride (courtesy of Patch):

Ride of Respect footage

Girls vs Bikes

Ok, here's a little bit of whimsy for a Friday afternoon. Girls love bikes, we all know that, so, in a completely non-male chauvinistic way (yeah, right!), let’s compare how a few match up to the some of the stunners in the biking world. Fnaaar, Fnaaar...

Kylie Minogue – Yamaha RD350LC YPVS. Fast, revvy, looks good and slightly unpredictable, this is a cracking ride – and, although its best days are a good while ago now, in the right hands it can still perform. Everyone loves “Elsie”.

Liz Hurley – Kawasaki Z1000A2. The connoisseur’s choice and a modern classic. Great engine, sleek looks, packs a punch and can be picked up relatively cheaply these days (though some of the parts may need a good buff up).

Fern Britton – Honda Deauville. Dull, charmless, slow and flabby. Not quite sure what the point of it is?

Holly Willoughby – Ducati Diavel. Haven’t ridden it, but how I would love to! Looks a bit of a lump to the uninitiated but examine it more closely and you’ll see that this is a true performance machine. Great styling, comfortable and has oodles of grunt. But take liberties and you’re in trouble...

Cheryl Cole – Bimota DB5. By all accounts a sweet handling chassis and if we’re all honest, something of a guilty pleasure. But ultimately, a bit of an empty vessel and prone to the (more than) occasional breakdown. Probably best to admire from a distance than actually get involved.

Angelina Jolie - Suzuki TL1000S. Great looking, fast, exciting - but a total nut job of a ride and inherently unstable. Will have you off as soon as look at you. Likes rough handling but overall, unless you have a death wish, not one for a long-term relationship.

So there you have it. Does the perfect bike (woman) exist? Let’s have a few of your thoughts...