I know this piece might sting a bit, but life's not always made of what one wants to hear, solely. This is not even a matter of right and wrong, it's just taking a look at how things are, when it comes to motorcycle branding. Yes, it's about branded gear and apparel.
Now, let's have one thing straightened out: apparel is fine, as long as we're not talking about a guy who exaggerates. But when it comes to gear, things are funny. Really.
Now, it's no secret that two of the biggest motorcycle manufacturers, Harley-Davidson and BMW, are very deep into this, but their roads are a bit different. However, other makers, such as Ducati or KTM are not far behind, as they are also offering a wide assortment of matching gear for their bikes. And there's nothing wrong in this.
BMW is probably way more into protective gear than the MoCo, probably because laws in Europe make helmets mandatory and the Bavarians' machines are used for so much more than showing off and riding in a straight line on the highway desert.
Even more, BMW System helmets (reportedly manufactured by Schuberth) are very good ones, BMW badge or not, and cannot even be compared to the 3/4 lids H-D sells.
When it comes to clothing, I guess things even out a bit, as both manufacturers understand that protection is essential. Given the very nature of the bikes they make, BMW and H-D have very different clothing lines: while BMW is all over functionality, Harley never misses an opportunity to make a biker fashion statement.
And this brings us to this piece's subject: will it be fashion, or will it be function?
Obviously, there's nothing wrong about a motorcyclist looking good, and riding ladies are doing a great job wearing their tight leather trousers. Still, it's always funny seeing a guy who buys a new bike and then spends some 20% more getting as much branded gear, apparel and accessories as he or she can.
Still nothing wrong with this, as it's only funny. While I couldn't tell anyone what to wear, because THAT would be way off, I cannot help thinking about how much the motorcycling world has changed.
H-D is selling an enthralling dream, with all sorts of slogans echoing notions such as freedom, rebel attitude, open road and whatnot. But if one can read between the lines, it all comes down to a marketing stunt: "go ahead, be free on the open road, be as rebel as you want, but do this wearing our gear."
Frankly, subtly suggesting that one is "not biker enough" without a branded leather jacket, a branded helmet and sunglasses is simply silly. And still, people go for this and buy hundreds of millions worth of such products.
Are they good? Most likely, are they the best? Definitely not, no matter what these fellows say. But are they making the customers feel great about their choice? By all means, yes.
Some might argue that I have no right to object in such matters, but I beg to differ, as I’ve already said that we're not discussing in terms of dos and don’ts here. Bikers all over the world are free to wear the gear they like, but just because they're all dressed in clothes branded by the maker of their bike doesn't make them any better or worse.
This thing makes me wonder why a rider would not choose the best protection he or she can afford. A Rukka jacket may not be exactly badass on a chrome bling-laden cruiser, I'll give you that.
But surrounding yourselves in Harley-branded clothes and other things is not making you any better as a person or as a rider. Good gear, however, will make you a less-scarred or a drier rider when things go rough and you meet the asphalt or the rain.
The same goes for a touring jacket from KTM or BMW: the badge is there to make you feel better, even though you've most likely spent 20% more for it. Your gear is definitely good and does its job very well, but there may be better options for less money.
The feel-good factor is one thing motorcycle manufacturers capitalize rather well: it brings in quite a lot of money and money is good. So if there will be a demand for branded cotton swabs, you better be sure they'll make them. Or even create the desire to use them.
If it works for so many other things, it'll most likely work for pretty much anything, from bike-branded undies to toothbrushes, and still nothing would be wrong with that.
Some chaps I've been talking to about this branding frenzy told me to take it easy, “they're fans, man, they like this. They'd get every last piece of bike-branded gear and all the trinkets if they had the money.”
While I can totally understand being in love with a bike (that sounded a bit weird, at least for me), it kind of reminds me of another discussion about Metallica. From where I stand, they stopped metalling some 22 years ago.
Still, they have a huge fan base, even though the very metal songs from the 80's sound terrible now, let alone the new ones, which are anything but metal. And yet the unquestioning masses of fans see them as one of the big names in thrash.
Well, they can call Metallica what they want, but Hetfield and Co stopped thrashing in '91. I still enjoy listening to the old albums and love THAT band, but that doesn't mean I have to refrain myself from saying their new music is plain BS.
For what it’s worth, I'd listen to the new Testament albums when I want good modern thrash, just like I'll always choose my Bell flip-up and cordura jacket when I ride the Boulevard M90R.
In the end, we are all free to choose what we buy and wear, but limiting the choices to what a bike maker shows you in the catalog seems more like self-induced sweet slavery. And if you're fine with that, I'm fine, too. Peace!
By the way, the new Testament album is a must-hear!
Now, it's no secret that two of the biggest motorcycle manufacturers, Harley-Davidson and BMW, are very deep into this, but their roads are a bit different. However, other makers, such as Ducati or KTM are not far behind, as they are also offering a wide assortment of matching gear for their bikes. And there's nothing wrong in this.
BMW is probably way more into protective gear than the MoCo, probably because laws in Europe make helmets mandatory and the Bavarians' machines are used for so much more than showing off and riding in a straight line on the highway desert.
Even more, BMW System helmets (reportedly manufactured by Schuberth) are very good ones, BMW badge or not, and cannot even be compared to the 3/4 lids H-D sells.
When it comes to clothing, I guess things even out a bit, as both manufacturers understand that protection is essential. Given the very nature of the bikes they make, BMW and H-D have very different clothing lines: while BMW is all over functionality, Harley never misses an opportunity to make a biker fashion statement.
And this brings us to this piece's subject: will it be fashion, or will it be function?
Obviously, there's nothing wrong about a motorcyclist looking good, and riding ladies are doing a great job wearing their tight leather trousers. Still, it's always funny seeing a guy who buys a new bike and then spends some 20% more getting as much branded gear, apparel and accessories as he or she can.
Still nothing wrong with this, as it's only funny. While I couldn't tell anyone what to wear, because THAT would be way off, I cannot help thinking about how much the motorcycling world has changed.
H-D is selling an enthralling dream, with all sorts of slogans echoing notions such as freedom, rebel attitude, open road and whatnot. But if one can read between the lines, it all comes down to a marketing stunt: "go ahead, be free on the open road, be as rebel as you want, but do this wearing our gear."
Frankly, subtly suggesting that one is "not biker enough" without a branded leather jacket, a branded helmet and sunglasses is simply silly. And still, people go for this and buy hundreds of millions worth of such products.
Are they good? Most likely, are they the best? Definitely not, no matter what these fellows say. But are they making the customers feel great about their choice? By all means, yes.
Some might argue that I have no right to object in such matters, but I beg to differ, as I’ve already said that we're not discussing in terms of dos and don’ts here. Bikers all over the world are free to wear the gear they like, but just because they're all dressed in clothes branded by the maker of their bike doesn't make them any better or worse.
This thing makes me wonder why a rider would not choose the best protection he or she can afford. A Rukka jacket may not be exactly badass on a chrome bling-laden cruiser, I'll give you that.
But surrounding yourselves in Harley-branded clothes and other things is not making you any better as a person or as a rider. Good gear, however, will make you a less-scarred or a drier rider when things go rough and you meet the asphalt or the rain.
The same goes for a touring jacket from KTM or BMW: the badge is there to make you feel better, even though you've most likely spent 20% more for it. Your gear is definitely good and does its job very well, but there may be better options for less money.
The feel-good factor is one thing motorcycle manufacturers capitalize rather well: it brings in quite a lot of money and money is good. So if there will be a demand for branded cotton swabs, you better be sure they'll make them. Or even create the desire to use them.
If it works for so many other things, it'll most likely work for pretty much anything, from bike-branded undies to toothbrushes, and still nothing would be wrong with that.
Some chaps I've been talking to about this branding frenzy told me to take it easy, “they're fans, man, they like this. They'd get every last piece of bike-branded gear and all the trinkets if they had the money.”
While I can totally understand being in love with a bike (that sounded a bit weird, at least for me), it kind of reminds me of another discussion about Metallica. From where I stand, they stopped metalling some 22 years ago.
Still, they have a huge fan base, even though the very metal songs from the 80's sound terrible now, let alone the new ones, which are anything but metal. And yet the unquestioning masses of fans see them as one of the big names in thrash.
Well, they can call Metallica what they want, but Hetfield and Co stopped thrashing in '91. I still enjoy listening to the old albums and love THAT band, but that doesn't mean I have to refrain myself from saying their new music is plain BS.
For what it’s worth, I'd listen to the new Testament albums when I want good modern thrash, just like I'll always choose my Bell flip-up and cordura jacket when I ride the Boulevard M90R.
In the end, we are all free to choose what we buy and wear, but limiting the choices to what a bike maker shows you in the catalog seems more like self-induced sweet slavery. And if you're fine with that, I'm fine, too. Peace!
By the way, the new Testament album is a must-hear!
Google News