Deeeeeeeep pockets!

8O

http://www.motorcycleclassics.com/vinta ... z34Wpn1A6j

 

wow!

I thought the Black Shadow was THE Vincent to lust for . . . guess not.

 

I think a Black prince is considerably more rare than the Shadow due to the bodywork, I'd rather have the Black Lghtning myself

 

Someone has more money than smarts. That is way too much to pay for any Vincent kit, let alone that model. A complete running and fully (not over) restored Black Prince went for $122k at Bonham's just two years ago. They are a bit rare (132 made total), but that rarity hasn't effected prices much over the years as it's truly a less desirable motorcycle (from a rider's standpoint). I'd consider that sale as an outlier (I hope).
A this point I've modified my goal of owning any Vincent before I'm 50, to being happy with an engine (even one in peices). It wasn't that long a go that a regular working guy could afford a Comet, and even those are getting spendy.

 

So it will go for twice as much today, or in a year or two. The world of the high-dollar people (bankers, etc.) are literally swimming in money, and they need any type of "Picasso's" to put that money into (since the cash itself falls in value as more and more of it is manufactured). Same thing is going on in the high-end real estate, art, and automotive worlds.

One day it will trickle-down to the XJ's......................

 

Admittedly the Black Prince is the rarest of rare when it comes to Vincents; but have you ever seen one? It's downright goofy looking.

I gotta go with Kickaha on this one; the Black Lightning is much more desirable from a rider's point of view.

Black Prince:




I'd rather have a Black Shadow (of which the Black Lightning is a stripped-down version.) Which would you rather ride?

 

The prince was ugly...give me the red Rapide

http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/21135/lot/292/

 

I concur! It's also shoddy looking. That is some piss poor glass work.

 

Now this is a cool bike, 321 made, ahead of it's time and very fast. Asking $30,000!

http://images.boatsandcycles.com/be8e70 ... 09eda0.jpg

What's even better about this one is that my dad has one, in MUCH better original condition

edit: Difficulty posting pics lately, and I didn't even realise it had no description. That sirs, is a 1959 Zundapp Citation. About half of it is aluminum, it has a 500cc OHC twin with a 5 speed transmission, and it has GEOMETRIC!! anti dive.

Deep pockets indeed.

 

The fiberglass is the only major component that Vincent farmed out, and the supplier failed to meet their delivery deadlines. At the time that the Prince's were developed, Mr. Vincent had lost majority control of his company.

 

Sorry for the thread theft, but I want to do a similar headlight and mount treatment to my Maxim from that Zundapp.

 

RE: the Zundapp--

That's not "Geometric Anti-Dive" (well, OK, sorta) it's an Earles Fork. Some BMWs had them up through the '60s. Their biggest advantage came into play when a sidecar was fitted.

That style headlight mounting, with the big swoopy ears, was also quite popular in the late '50s and early '60s; look at any Triumph or BSA of the era.

Something else about that Zundapp: that seat isn't a giant block of foam. It has springs in it like a box-spring from a bed with a thin pad over top. (Again, as did BMWs of the era.)

 

You can call it a rose if you want to, but it's still, "anti-dive". 8)

Thanks for the recap! :wink:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_fork#Earles

http://classicmotorcycles.about.com/od/ ... sion_6.htm

 

If they where to put the brake lug on a vertical leg, or weirdly, the opposite side of where they did, you would not have geometric anti dive.

Zero, and even HUGE dive forces.

 

Or, if you had just single fork legs on each side, with the brake anchored against the lower fork leg...

oh, wait; like EVERY CONVENTIONAL MOTORCYCLE in recent history?

Kind of makes you wonder why the Earles fork design never caught on even though the concept has clear advantages. BMW tried it again more recently with a similar, "lever-arm" front suspension, but nobody bought it.

Are we THAT traditionally minded? Or does all that significantly additional unsprung weight have that big of a detriment on steering to the point of making it drive like a truck? Or is it the "caster" effect because of where the "center of moment" is for the suspension? I know from personal experience that a '66 Beemer with an Earles fork steers like a Mack.

Let's find a Dnepr or Ural owner to ask.

 

Styling had a lot to do with the demise of Earls-type forks. They also require several more manufacturing steps than telescopic forks do (and more raw material; production costs are everything when it comes to making a profit). There's also that funny trait they have; sure an Earles fork is anti-dive, but it is also pro-lift. Having the front-end rise under heavy braking isn't exactly confidence inspiring.

 

k-moe, that would be my first guess.