Talk:John Britten

'ICI' disambiguation request

There is a link to ICI, a disambiguation page, that needs expert input to properly change. Thanks for your assistance. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:14, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

pictures

I have several pictures that I have taken on one or both of my trips to visit this bike at Te Papa Museum in Wellington NZ. How do i post them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Preclaro tipo (talk • contribs) 07:40, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Frameless design

Isn't the Vincent an earler example of "frameless" design? M-72 07:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

advert?

this article appears to have a very one-sided point of view, it almost looks like an advertisement page. I corrected a very subjective comment about Britten's bikes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.208.36.90 (talk) 14:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

I agree, this seems dangerously close to self-advertisement. I would recommend a going-over by an editor who is familiar with motorcycles (as I am not). I can appreciate that this gentleman invented a motorcycle that was as important as the Harley-Davidson, but it would be much more believable by just giving the facts and letting them speak for themselves. I'd edit it down but I don't want to lose any of the material which distinguishes this man's motorcycle from all the others. Is there ANYONE who has ever disagreed with this design? Some evidence of criticism or disagreement would be nice. Accounting4Taste 20:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Unlikely. The design was revolutionary and effective. Given that he made everything, including the sand moulds to cast the 11 engines built for example, this was a unique; development had barely started when he died. The difficulty for the industry was its likely success. The design requirements were tightened up for competition (eg the use of carbon fibre which the mainstream were not using in this way at that time in this sport). Also, large homologation numbers to qualify for competition were brought in at this time, partly it is alleged to squeeze out self-made newcomers who could challenge the likes of Ducati essentially for chump change in Ducati's world. Lastly, he didn't help himself in some ways. There is no reason why he should have been as good at promotion as he was at engineering, but unfortunately he made some missteps along the way in this area (eg a controversial promotional film), opening the door to misinformation from all interested parties. This means that finding a true record of his work is difficult. Every version is difficult to substantiate now (eg his income and capital worth, the nature of his factory and its equipment, the overall feasibility of developing the bike further - it had a tendency to go best with the front wheel slightly off the ground at certain points, some allege!

Finally, perhaps I'm incorrect in some of my conclusions from reading what's out there. This person will likely have an element of 'myth' as part of his legacy, not just here but elsewhere too. Coolcmsc (talk) 12:17, 24 May 2025 (UTC)