Function > Form?

[Dan K]

I go with function over form almost every time.  You?

[stew71]

Most of the time, yes. But I'm sure someone who rides an Italian bike will be along shortly to disagree with you.

[Orson]

Don't let Ducati's 57 consecutive WSBK championships fool you, it's all about form.

[county]

Function is usually attractive, except for women....

[Dan K]

I had a Tuono for a while (miss it) and bolted on a top case so I could commute to work (used a piece of wood with a givi plate, a bracket and a seat pin instead of the rear seat).  Looked goofy as hell, but did the job.

While the Tuono looks great, also bought it for its honkin motor and ergos.  Not discounting form completely, just relegating it to a spot behind function...

[gradus]

No, I wouldn't put a top box on my bike.  

[Kneescrubber]

No, I wouldn't put a top box on my bike.  

Agreed.

Although if it were designed as a part of the whole package, I could probably live with it. But that's expressing a preference of form over function.

[antvq]

I still wear Crocs.   Function over form baby      

[AutoXer]

No matter how good something works, if it's ugly to my eye I ain't buying (motorcycles, cars, cameras, women).  And no matter how beautiful something is, if it doesn't work good I won't buy it (motorcycles, cars, cameras, women).  It has to offer a blend of both.  

[axelwik]

Don't let Ducati's 57 consecutive WSBK championships fool you, it's all about form.

+1

[Meemuh]

I have a Concours.

[Kneescrubber]

I still wear Crocs.   Function over form baby      

Right. And you wear them all day every day. Right?

[gritsngravy]

Pretty much always go with what works for me.   Bolted on a screen and a top box on my King and it's cool as hell.  Fashion is for women and men of a certain persuasion.

[mesmotized]

I've always believed in function over form.  Then again, that doesn't mean that form is irrelevant either!

[CLAY]

Function over form, almost every time.  

[JReazor]

I mostly agree but there are limits.

[radlefty]

No matter how good something works, if it's ugly to my eye I ain't buying (motorcycles, cars, cameras, women).  And no matter how beautiful something is, if it doesn't work good I won't buy it (motorcycles, cars, cameras, women).  It has to offer a blend of both.  

+1

[antvq]

Right. And you wear them all day every day. Right?

No, only where they function well.  For other times, there is other footwear that is better suited.  

[phoenix]

I waiver back and forth. Sometimes I buy something because I believe in either side (function over form, or form over function). But then a little while down the road, when I have had my fill with the negatives, I sell it off.

[greasemonkey79]

I chose my bike because, to me, it was the best blend of function and form.
Is it the most beautiful bike ever made? No, but it’s a good looking machine in its own right. It’s pleasing to my eye so it meets the “form” standard I have.
Is it the best touring bike ever made (function)? Nope, but it’ll get the job done well enough for me. It meets a lot of the other “functions” I look for as well (power, handling, comfort, fun) so all in all I’d say my function requirements are met.

Most of the bikes that excel at “function” are less than pleasing to the eye, IMHO, and out of all the most beautiful bikes ever made I ‘m not sure I’d want to put any significant number of miles on any of them (not without a LOT of ibuprofen on hand).
There has to be a balance between the two (function and form). It’s difficult to define the point where both are met to a satisfactory level but I know it when I see it.
So basically in all of my rambling what I’m saying is, I agree with this guy:

No matter how good something works, if it's ugly to my eye I ain't buying (motorcycles, cars, cameras, women).  And no matter how beautiful something is, if it doesn't work good I won't buy it (motorcycles, cars, cameras, women).  It has to offer a blend of both.  

[GTS_Rider]

Yeah, this was for real. Milk-crate bolted to rear seat on almost brand-new RC-51 a few years back.

Eh, he wimped out in the face of the storm and ran for home on one of the b4TheSnowFlies rides years ago. Good try though...    

*Edited to add...

The first spare rear seat he tried to buy off E-bay, he made the mistake of telling the truth of what he was gonna do with it. After hearing the story, the seller actually refused to sell, even though it was the high bid for the seat! lol

[Gary B.]

I mostly agree but there are limits.

Same here.

[Rincewind]

I ride a sportbike stripped of its forms, and topped with an ugly Givi case.  Form follows function for me.  If I wanted a nice Form I'd go empty my man-purse at the nearest Ducati dealer.  

[karlfitt]

Most of the time, yes. But I'm sure someone who rides an Italian bike will be along shortly to disagree with you.

I ride an Italian Bike, and it has both.

Traded a 2004 BMW K 1200 RS for the 2002 Ducati ST4s

Both sport tourers.
Both had hard luggage, but I had to build the rack to put the top box on the Duck because Ducati and Givi both stopped making them.

The Duck functions very well thank you.
More comfortable on a long day than the BMW was. (I have done SS 1000s on both bikes)
More fun in the twisties (Ducati)
Better gas milage.

I never had anyone tell me "nice bike" on the beemer, but get it all the time with the Duck

[keepergale]

Yeah, this was for real. Milk-crate bolted to rear seat on almost brand-new RC-51 a few years back.

Eh, he wimped out in the face of the storm and ran for home on one of the b4TheSnowFlies rides years ago. Good try though...    

*Edited to add...

The first spare rear seat he tried to buy off E-bay, he made the mistake of telling the truth of what he was gonna do with it. After hearing the story, the seller actually refused to sell, even though it was the high bid for the sea

Looking at that . . . . . It is just wrong! I need to rethink my form vs function values.

[jfurf]

To a certain extent yes, but I will NEVER own a top box. That's where i draw the line. I'm just too vain for it.

[bomber]

If you ride something with tupperwear, it ain't alllll function -- it simply isn't needed almost all the time, in most cases, and contributes nothing to functions in some case ;-}

I like Function, and it informs my selection process the most -- though form certainly helps ;-}

The elusivly defined garage factor seems to have slipped through my fingers since I pruchased a KLR however.

[sagerat]

I have a GSA and a Ural.  I'm the poster boy of Function>Form.  

[Dan K]

I don't ignore form, it just follows function.  As long as I don't sacrifice function, I'll get the better looking of my options.  But I'll always be able to put a top box on my daily rider whatever bike it may be.

- Dan

[black hills]

If you ride something with tupperwear, it ain't alllll function -- it simply isn't needed almost all the time, in most cases, and contributes nothing to functions in some case ;-}

I like Function, and it informs my selection process the most -- though form certainly helps ;-}

The elusivly defined garage factor seems to have slipped through my fingers since I pruchased a KLR however.

once you get the DS disease there is no hope for you....sorry...

[X1Glider]

Function can be beautiful.  As an engineer, I was attracted to the R1100GS.  Ugly as sin to most people.  The fact that it did exactly what I required of it made it physically attractive.  You just had to understand why the function took on a given form to appreciate it more.

[Windblown]

I've owned some ugly bikes, boats, and trucks.  But man... I do love looking at eye candy!