Talk:Suzuki Katana

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Motorcycling Suzuki Katana is within the scope of the Motorcycling WikiProject, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of motorcycles and motorcycling. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Zed1, how come you removed my mention of Hans Muth? Your claim that he did not design the Katana is a bold one. Please show your research because I am pretty certain that Muth was, if not the sole designer, then the head designer (in which case he would presumably get most of the kudos anyway). Refer the following:

The latter seems to indicate that Muth was not the sole designer and may in fact just be a contributor to the design. At any rate, his name is indelibly linked to the Katana, whether sole designer or not, and I believe that this should be specifically mentioned in the article. If you mean that Muth did not design the bike mechanically but only the styling, I don't believe my original wording was misleading in this way. --Mintie 06:47, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Hello Mintie
Hans Muth was not the designer that is a fact. He was also not the chief designer. He never put pen to paper and was rarely to be seen as the bikes were being designed. I was there. Hans Muth got the contract to design the bikes. Hans-Georg Kasten, Jan Fellstrom and several modellers including Karl-Heinz Abe, and Joachim Saaksmeier did the work. It ended in a legal dispute with the out come that either the name 'Target design' should be used in connection with the Katanas or the following 3 names: Hans Muth, Hans-Georg Kasten and Jan Fellstrom. To keep it short I have always restricted it to Target design but if you wish to add all 3 names please do so. However I cannot allow only his name to be mentioned. Hope you understand, I cannot be responsible for all that is written over the Katanas in the general press - do you believe everything you read! I would like this to be an unbiased account for histories sake. Hans Muth was also responsible for the later 750 updated model but whether he designed it I cannot say as Target design had nothing to do with that design. You can always check the facts with Hans-Georg Kasten at Target design.
You also say styling, well it was designed and not just 'styled' there is a big difference and a great deal of effort, emotion and thought went into its creation and maybe that is why it has stood the test of time.
Hi Zed1 - I presume it is you - may I suggest adding --~~~~ at the end of your discussion so as to sign and date it? (Click the signature button above the editing field). I've also added colons at the beginning of your paragraphs for readability, hope you don't mind.
Anyway, I would be happy enough with leaving the designers as Target Design, since that's not under dispute. It would be helpful if you could provide any references to back up your claim, though. By the "later 750 updated model" I presume you mean the popup headlight 1984 design? Yes, it's also my understanding that this was a design by the in-house Suzuki team.
With reference to your comments about "styling" vs. "design", I hear you. I use the term "styling" for lack of a better one. I was trying to differentiate between designing an entire motorcycle (engine, frame, etc.) mechanically, and the work carried out by Target Design, which as I understand was predominantly to do with the styling and not the engine, suspension, frame, etc. I know that there is a lot of effort that goes into the styling of the motorcycle and that it is not just a matter of drawing shapes on paper. But it doesn't matter, it's just semantics anyway! :-) Cheers. --Mintie 07:15, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hello Mintie

Thanks for the tips re: editing

The problem with reference material is it is all based on what has already been written about the bikes, which is rarely ever totally correct...you only need to read a few articles to see conflicting statements even on the websites you have quoted...although they are better than some. Yes, I did mean the '84 stylised version of the original. I say 'stylised' because who needs a pop-up headlamp on a bike, (extra weight, extra costs). That is the difference between design and style.

Designers sometimes get involved with the concept design of a bike which can determine the engine type, location and frame structure. As a designer myself I hate the word Styling because it reduces our work to something superficial and only about appearances. Nothing could be further than the truth. Though I agree with you it is to a large extent semantics. Anyway good talking to you:) Adios--Zed1 10:43, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

PS well I thought Wikipedia would provide a great opportunity for me to write something I knew about. Sadly most of what I had carefully written was rewritten with many errors and finally my images were removed...How I am supposed to prove I have copyright I do not know. But it has finished my interest in Wikipedia and makes it clear to me that it is no better than any other encyclopedia!--Zed1 14:33, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A free licensed photo or two would be nice

 It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.
The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

[edit] Renaming of Suzuki range wikis?

Please follow the discussion on talk:Suzuki GS series if you're interested. Thank you.--Cancun771 08:11, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Squished Photo

Looking at the photo on this article, it's readily apparent to me that the image has been shortened sideways and ended up squishing the picture. The bike certainly isn't that short, and a lot of the engine elements look severely distorted from what they are in real life. --71.231.131.200 (talk) 21:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)