UFOtp, I know how perspective, camera angles and shapes can play tricks on you, so let's look at it.

From the angle at which we are viewing the top of the bike from, I see only a 1º to 2º difference from 90º vertical - the chain looks to be almost perfectly vertical, so there isn't much of a degree of odd perspective going on. However, according to the side view, we ARE visualizing in the top view what appears to be a misalignment of the seat with the backbone, but this is because the backbone curves down and we're not viewing it from perfectly above. Now if you look closely again at the seat from the top view, you can see the frame curving alongside it on both sides roughly to the center of the length of the seat, then the hardtail extension begins and move rearward and downward to the axle.

And the seat to fender alignment? If we straightened the view of the bike up to 90º vertical it's my guess that it would align. I had to study it further and it is close, but too close for the eye to exactly define as being in "perfect" alignment because of that damn offset of the hardtail and the slight off 90º view to the right we are seeing.

The more I look at it the more I believe the rear wheel IS or is close to being inline with the frame, but since my attention has gone straight to the more obvious offset/space on the right side of the hardtail and the camera angle affect on the down curving backbone between the fuel tank and the seat, it sends my brain into twisting/distorting what I am actually seeing.

I'd really like to see a perfectly centered above the rear wheel photo to end my skepticism but for now I'm just now gonna' grab a beer for new Years and then go kiss the cat and kick the wife [neither of which is true, I'm divorced and don't have a cat anymore, LOL], then go to bed, because I am old!

Happy New Year!

=8^)

 

I could see how the curve of the backbone could be throwing me off with the compounded lean angle, and your assessment seems sound enough. Perhaps my distaste for the 335 mm (yes I'm exaggerating) rear tire fad has distorted my ability to view this objectively.


Happy New Year and enjoy whatever kind of machines that get you going!

 

You can thank people like the occ *** clowns for that UFO. Can't wait to see the onslaught of people wanting to run a 23" front wheel now

 

What is it with the bigger front wheel thing anyway? I can remember as a kid seeing the "choppers" with the larger front wheels [and extended forks] wondering WTF that was all about? And after many years of asking guys if there was some kind of advantage like easier steering etc., I am no closer to an answer other than "...I guess it just looks cool?"

I think the larger front wheel looks like a$$ along with rediculously stretched out forks because I'm more into symmetry [and stability!]. As far as the rear tires I think they look good up until about 200 series then they start to look a little "off."

The guys I know who have owned/ridden the latest trend of sleek stretched and hammered down 300+ series rear tire bikes say they are as uncomfortable as fark and ride like crapolla. And these are $35,000 bikes? And dont' even get me started on occ and their line - they're a bunch of hacks and make some of the crapiest looking "custom" bikes I have ever seen. I guess it's for the tv ratings and with $$ you can do what you want, like have a show where you fight with your siblings, MIG weld without welding shields, and have an entire crew of foreigners offstage with grinders and boxes and boxes of carborundum wheels to smooth out their crappy welds?

'Just my opinion, 'worth what you paid for it. Happy New Year!

=8^)

 

Not the choppers I remember from back in the day. They all had smaller front wheels and long springers.

 

BMX, you just wait dude, someone is going to bring "donk" into the H-D world and people will eat it up. I like things that look good, I even appreciate weird, odd, and different, but about the time you remove all function entirely I've gotta call it what it is.

 

Ok, I won't tell you that I like it.