Search results

since the cost of your m1 exit is in your m1, why not just roll the dice and see if you can pass at the ministry instead of taking the course if you're going to get it anyway. the worst thing that could happen is that you don't get your m2, and you proceed how you would have anyway...?

Re: To the girl on the white R6 oh, i've discovered it. i just hadn't got around to naming the moves.

+1. ON FIRE!!! FIRE I SAY!!! BOTH HANDS!!! HEY!!! I'M WAVING!!! OPDude, i dunno. Sometimes i'm just busy. I feel for your need for me to justify you.

Shush. Ima werkin' here.

Which begs the question: Which ""Oh you so sexy baby, wanna come for a ride?" pick up lines" *do* impress you?

It's more the booty in them in this case, but sure.

Dude. Sit back. Enjoy the show. Life's too short.

riding with headphones will never become illegal IMHO - they'd have to address the deaf driver issue before they could make them so.

Ah, i didn't know that. The statement makes a bit more sense now.

Uhm. If you have some rash on it, it's really not flawless, is it?

http://www.lunaticfringe.org/~sundie/motorcycle/243286_10150274230941438_531836437_9375686_4554030_o.jpg http://www.lunaticfringe.org/~sundie/motorcycle/278304_10150302819706438_531836437_9604960_7297855_o.jpg PM me if you're interested.

Have you been off bikes for 30 years, or just sport bikes? If the former - you may want to exclude the larger displacement if you want to take the twisties. I mean, they'll *do* it, but if you haven't been on a bike for 30 years, you'll be shocked at the mid-displacement range's performance...

Critical thinking. This is what's lacking in society today, i swear. "can't i just look it up on Google instead of figuring it out?" :sigh:

are you looking for any particular model/style?

Because beer is tasty tasty goodness. And also the vegetarian content of my diet.

There there. <pat pat pat> it will be all right.

And you went with it, rather than arguing against it. *shrug* I was pointing out the flaw in your test. then offered a much more accurate test. Then asserted that the drag co-efficient difference between a more reasonable comparison (120 vs 300) would be negligible. Thus, my point. You can...

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=Toronto,+ON,+Canada&daddr=44.191098,-79.4638517+to:44.28283,-79.48876+to:44.31667,-79.39389+to:44.32911,-79.3374+to:44.33074,-79.21673+to:44.39002,-79.17181+to:44.47243,-79.14361+to:44.56242,-78.98247+to:44.6471427,-79.1351729+to:44.879969,-78.8032...

Yes, but you were being ludicrous by assuming a 500lb rider in the first place. But you had to be, to link weight and aerodynamics in the first place. And, point in fact, differences in rider weights between 120 and 300 (reasonable upper and lower limits) present very little drag co-efficient...

there's a flaw in your argument. The 500 lb rider could be a very short compact person in race leathers, and the 100 lb rider could be a beanpole with a penchant for loose clothing flapping around. A more reasonable discussion would be a 120lb rider vs a 120lb rider with 380lbs of weights...