Pipeburn Poll: Should ‘Form Follows Function’ Apply to Custom Bikes?
Saturday, June 9, 2012 
Browsing the web the other day, I stumbled upon a repost of the beautiful Old Empire Pup we revealed to the world on these very pages. But unlike you pack of freaks, the guys reading this article were obviously not died-in-the-wool custom bike freaks, but more of your regular ridin' Joes. Reading through the comments, I found one that went something along the lines of, "Aesthetically pleasing but I wouldn't want to travel any distance on it. To me, any bike has to be ridden first, looked at second." Now this really got me thinking. What kind of mad man would value how a bike rides over and above how it looks. Especially after seeing the the bike in question? The answer is, of course, heaps of people. I mean, how many BMW R1200GS do you see on the roads? And if there's any bike that perfectly represents form following function, that old German mule would have to be it. But are they onto something? Are we all fashion victims just like that ape hanger maniac above? Are we all insane to judge a bike on looks alone and ignore how it actually rides?
Reader Comments (1)
Depends on the goal.
Not every bike has to be a long distance tourer. A bike suitable for 600 km a day tours needs entirely different things than a bike suitable for a 50 km all-out hoon on local back roads or for being fastest around a track. That's all functional stuff.
On the other hand, if you're taking it to a show on a trailer and not ever really plan to ride it in any practical sense of the word, I'd argue that you're making art, not motorcycles, and might as well not fit an engine.
There's lots of grey area in between ofcourse. Even with the GS crowd, lots of them care how things look and fit lots of laser-cut aluminium trinkets that don't really do a whole lot other than weigh the bike down. ;-)