People have often asked me if there is a difference between a biker and a motorcycle rider. I have shied away from this topic, because it is very controversial. In many riding circles, it is a topic that is to be avoided, as many riders believe the distinction is significant. Let me give you a little background. In the early years of motorcycling there really were no motorcycles! There were motorbikes......bicycles with motors strapped on them. The folks that were riding these contraptions often built them and took pride in their innovations. Getting around on these bikes was a real adventure that involved riding skills:the roads were rough with many challenges and the bikes did not have suspension systems and their frames were often flimsy. These pioneer riders also needed mechanical skills, as their bikes broke down several times a day and great creativity because of limited resources. This group of people were called bikers. There was a camaraderie in this group, which was fueled by their great riding stories and their road adventures together. They also experienced a certain degree of prejudiced from the "normal folk" who saw their devotion to motorbikes rather childish and unproductive. As motorbikes evolved into motorcycles, the skill set to successfully ride and maintain these two wheel vehicles remained complex and demanding. The passion for riding motorcycles continued to attract adventurous people, who were often willing to set aside convention and pursue the world of biking. Very early on these folks were called bikers.
As time passed, motorcycles became more reliable, but the attraction was still to a sub-group of adventurous, fun loving people. They were bikers! Leather clad road warriors willing to get around using an unconventional mode of transportation. It was not a sport but rather a lifestyle. Present day there are clubs, various riding associations interest groups etc., but in many ways the lone biker is still the compelling image. Yes, I believe there is a difference between bikers and motorcycle riders; the question is: how does one choose to define the distinction? Does one approach it from a historical perspective?, behavioral perspective?, or by affiliation? So the controversy is fueled by one's perspective, needless to say (so why did I say it?). My solution is to offer two different checklists. You choose the one you believe is valid.
ARE YOU A BIKER
(Historical Perspective)
___ I like gravel roads
___ I like riding in stormy weather
___ I do all my bike maintenance
___ I like to try to fix my bike before getting professional help
___ Getting lost and wandering is enjoyable
___ I try to ride every day
___ Give me a sleeping bag and a peanut butter sandwich, I'm good for a week
___ My motorcycle is my main means of transportation
___ I don't need a fancy bike with a lot of chrome.
___ Biking is great fun
If 7 or more of these statements describe you: congratulations you are a biker!
ARE YOU A BIKER
(Current Perspective)
___ I have a beard
___ I have tattoos
___ I ride without a helmet
___ Harleys are all I ride
___ Loud pipes are a necessity
___ Rain gear is for wimps
___ A leather jacket or vest and chaps are the only real ride-wear
___ Chrome and a custom paint job is preferred
___ No motorcycle shop for me, I fix it or my buddy will
___ I belong to a motorcycle club
If 7 or more of these statements describe you; congratulations you are a biker!
The differing view points will continue and as new invitations in motorcycle are developed such as: electric cycles (which are in production now) hover bikes and even invisible bikes, the waters will be muddier than the present. This entire topic is really trivial and a waste of time; that's why I take it very seriously!
