I to liked Gordon, His posts were very insightful concise and lengthy with good content. I have yet to here that man tell a joke.

Ahhh the old days,,,,,,,,,,,,, classic threads and low TAT's

A great loss to the board, -member 34

How ironic this thread contains the first banner ad in the forums!

 

I liked Gordon too . He was a very technical rider , he didn't really care for a Polaris and I understand why . He did a lot of slow speed obstical hopping . His choices of ATV's reflected that . I miss his writing style and his points of view .

Sledder ... LOL ... I liked him too , he was funny ,, and intelligent ,, and I do not recall him ever being abusive to any person ,,,, but man ,, he could rip on Polaris's ... And all with a grain of truth ..

 

I remember GB real well.I personally liked him.We had a few respectful debates in the past.His posts were lengthly,however,they were also usually helpful.He was a MASTER at DETAILING a post.Himself,Tree Farmer,and Armyman are among the best in here at that,though sometimes hard to understand,their posts do try to get to the point.

I was Pro Polaris,he was not,so the war starts.We had a debate on the ''true 4x4'' issue of Polaris quads.He said Pols are'nt true 4x4s because all 4 wheels are not directly linked together by MECHANICAL means.Rear wheel slippage must occur first,he says.

I responded,
Please give me an instance where Pols AWD system failed because it was'nt mechanically linked?He provided examples,like rock hopping,but that still did'nt PROVE his point to me.Simple,I win,he loses.[im just kiddin]

Anyhow,he was a great guy that was very opionated,never the less,I do wish him the best at whatever it is he is now doing.===Bill

 

how long has gordon been gone? did he get kicked off? why did he leave?

later
jon

 

Ledebuhr1, seems like Gordon's not posted frequently in close to a year. Gordon seldom posts now from his own choice; he's never violated Forum guidelines as far as I know; therefore, he's never been banned.

Gordon has re-entered the world of dirt bikes; an activity occupying much of his energy and time nowadays.

I disagree with the suggestion Gordon was biased toward Honda, because he also owned Kawasaki and Suzuki quads. While Polaris was not his favorite brand, he gave these machines due credit for their capabilities.

While I may not always have agreed with Gordon's ideas and opinions, he always expressed his point of view responsibly, and respected those of others. True, he did not suffer fools gladly; however, he was man enough to admit his rare mistakes.

As to the length of Gordon's posts, he only covered the subject, in my opinion. He took the effort to provide background and analysis of the topic under discussion, but I found him a compelling rather than a boring writer.

Gordon's post enriched the Forum; I miss them.

Diogenes

 

Like I said before, his interest swung back into dirtbikes. Last I heard, he had just bought one. He used to race MX.

 

That's true, copy the link in the first message and paste it into your browser window and it will take you right to the dirt bike and remote control aircraft section with all of his posts.

Kagey, you said something about long posts. How about this one on model aircraft from Gordon L. Banks

.old_ace@my-deja.com wrote:
> Shop apron strings I guess..... RCR is losing ground in my opinion.
> Unless you are a scale addict, you have less and less to read.
> Frankie T. and his gang don't need a Scale Magazine when they have
> Gordon in their pocket.
> John Hathaway

John, should we assume that your lack of appreciation for scale
modeling is because you're tied to your wife's apron strings, and she won't allow you to spend the time and money for scale models?

Or should we assume that you're no longer interested in scale modeling because you've already tried it, and you discovered that your building and flying skills are so poor, you'd never be any good at it?

Well of course both of the above assumptions are ridiculous!!
And I'm guessing that you consider both assumptions insulting!
I'm not serious about either one. I was just taking at stab at playing your game of making up false and insulting remarks about something you don't happen to like.

Yes, R/C REPORT is heavily into covering scale modeling. But it has nothing to do with being in anyone's pocket, and I resent the
implication.

R/C REPORT had a scale and giant scale column a long time before we hired Frank Tiano. Our expanded coverage of scale modeling has been a direct result of reader feedback, asking for more scale subjects, more reviews of scale kits, etc. It has always been our policy to provide our readers with the subjects they want, as indicated by our reader surveys and subscription renewal forms. Our renewal reminder cards are the only ones I've ever seen that ask for more than money. Our renewal reminders ask for comments and suggestions... what we call "Reader Feedback". Based on reader feedback, we eliminated all coverage of R/C cars and boats. Later we dropped our helicopter column, then our jet column, and finally even our sailplane column (one of my personal favorites). In eliminating these columns, we shut ourselves out of the ad market for these subjects, but we did so anyway, because our readers said they'd rather see the space used for other subjects.

Meanwhile, we ADDED columns on R/C combat and SMALL models.
Why? You guessed it... reader feedback.

We've reduced the number of articles with the sole intent to be
humorous and entertaining. Why? Right again... reader feedback.

R/C REPORT'S emphasis on scale modeling is due to just that, John, reader feedback... nothing more, and nothing less. Frank Tiano and Pat McCurry were hired to help supply more coverage in an area
requested by our readers.

If you don't like scale modeling, fine. But I don't appreciate
false accusations and insinuations any more than you felt
complimented by the two ridiculous examples of false assumptions with which I began this message. (For which I apologize, but I hope they helped to make my point.)

In closing, however, I will say this about "Reader Feedback": I regret to say that we've learned that you can't always depend
on it. When you ask modelers what they want in an R/C magazine,
you always find three things at the very top of the list...
"We want honesty."
"We want integrity."
"We don't want another monthly catalog."

So, R/C REPORT gives you that. And the end result?

"Sorry, but it's not pretty enough."

Most modelers don't even realize it, but the majority seem to
place more importance on glossy color photos, than they do on
reliable information. On more than one occasion, I have heard
modelers discuss this at the magazine rack in a hobby shop.
"Buy this one. It has more color pictures in it."

Advertisers have known this for years. Big, fancy, shiny, and
colorful ads always sell more than smaller black and white ads.

And I think that's sad. But, we're now trying to use more color
photos. We still can't compete with the slick photos in the
glossy monthly catalogs, though... not if we're going to keep
our promise of never having more than 50% ads. But maybe that's
a mistake! Apparently, modelers really like all the colorful
and glossy monthly catalogs. We sure buy enough of them!

I'm sometimes amazed at what we consider 'good values".
Magazines, whether $17.00 a year or $30.00 a year, are an
incredible bargain compared to most other hobby related
products. If we spend only two hours with each issue, that's
24 hours a year. We don't fly many models that many hours in
a year! That would be 144 flights averaging 10 minutes each.
How many models have you flown 144 times? And how many hours
do we get from a $15.00 gallon of fuel? And you can't enjoy
either of those examples while on the throne, either!

So anyway, John, please don't make hurtful insults and/or
insinuations about something just because it doesn't appeal
to you. I don't like beer, but that doesn't make it evil.
(I do like pizzas, though, and they ARE evil!)

Happy Flying, all!

Gordon L. Banks

 

Odin,

You shocked me there for second. The way your signature appeared at the bottom of your post it made it look like Gordon L Banks owned a 2001 Polaris Sportsman 500 Camo Green! He was before my time but I gather from everyone's comments that chances of him owning that Polaris are slim to none.

DJ

 

Honda 313cc Powroll with works performance front shocks, custom rear shock mount, and 25/26" Bi-claws.

Suzuki 500 which he almost ended up driving off a cliff.

Got the 450es with black waters and TOTALLY hated them. About 9 Side wall puntures in all made him go back to the Bi_claws he had put on his 300 and praire 400. The 450es got a power kit which he realy liked, and a HL big bore kit which he realy hated. He regreted buying the ES model cause he could not pop the clutch to get the front end over rocks.

his Praire 400 was Traded in to get the XR400 which caused us to lose such a great contributor to this forum.

 

Anyone remeber Gordon's "the Real Truth for women"???

It was a very funny list of things that I now live by pretty much. I will have to find the list and repost it. But at the bottom of the list he simply stated the PURE truth.

"POlaris doesn't have true 4wd, it has AWD."

This was one of the biggest things to get to gordon. He knew that Polarises pulled all 4 tires in the mud, but knew that it wasn't "TRUE 4WD" only the King Quad has a "TRUE 4wd" cause YOU can control what tires pull and not have to wait on the reaction of other things.