| Author | Message | ||
     Mndwgz |
An idea and/or suggestion, probably been mulled over already; 1125 or 1199 Barracuda II kit that I could take down to the DMV so they could have a quick boo at and throw a tag on. Wrenches are ready. | ||
| Ponti1 |
Court, I read that article today as well...The two dealer statements you've quoted here are the ones that really highlight the fact that some just simply have no clue. It's incredibly ignorant in today's climate for someone to be in business and honestly have the mindset that doing things the way they've always been done is without issue. | ||
| Rocketman |
I have a dream of HD, responding to pressure from stockholders and media, turning over the "non-integrated" Buell assets such as all the 1125R and future products. If Harley-Davidson doesn't want to make them fine. . . Court, might I ask why you think Harley would not do this either now or before anyway? One would assume it makes good business sense for Harley as it shows their integrity in believing in a product they can't take further forward themselves but it remains a well respected quality innovative brand which still makes Harley look good for getting involved and perhaps lifting Buell up the ladder along the way. I mean, aside from the possibility of the vindictiveness of some heads of whatever, is there possibly an ethical business reason why Harley would close Buell rather than allow Buell independence to stand on it's own two feet. Are we overlooking something? Rocket | ||
| Jaimec |
Never attribute to conspiracy what can be explained away by stupidity. | ||
| Fast1075 |
Jaime...can I add that to my personal favourite quotes list? That is GOOD. | ||
| Speedy818 |
Rocket - what you're missing, that's been alluded to here many times, is that the bulk of XB technology is now also across the entire HD line - not just the XB/XL engine, but the fuel injection technology, etc. Harley needed to take the loss this fiscal year. The simplest way to divest yourself of an asset is to just s-can it and say you're closing operations. Then the technology can be licensed away bit by bit as new entities like EBR come along. We'll most likely never see another XB manufactured, but the 1125 platform still holds promise. But the fuel in the frame, FI, etc. all have to be licensed back from Harley, as the MoCo owns those IP rights. Believe me, these guys know what they're doing and they're going to do what's best for HD. Holding patents where people want to utilize them with no cross cannibalization to your existing lines is NOT what they want. The quick turnaround of EBR shows this. Even in the world of big business - this is all moving at XB9S speed. | ||
| Rocketman |
Well yes I can grasp the XB technology thing, but even so, why would Harley be detrimentally affected if that technology went to an independent Buell? After all, F.I is a shared fuelling system the world over. Why should it be any different when applied to a Buell or a Sportster? As for fuel in the frame. Harley don't use it so why not give it back to Buell under a new agreement / new company? I suppose what I'm asking is, aside from the manufacturing logistics of the product(s) themselves, could there be a genuine reason for Harley to not just cast Buell off and let them go it alone? I thought if anyone would have a deeper insight it might Rocket | ||
| Jaimec |
I'm not the one who came up with that. I believe I first read it from Dr. Jerry Pournelle (the Sci-Fi writer). He is a firm believer in "Occam's Razor" (the simplest explanation is usually the correct one). | ||
| Fast1075 |
I see...thanks Jaime. | ||
| Dbird29 |
(Dr) Jerry Pournelle was great in Byte magazine. | ||
| Hughlysses |
He's written some pretty cool articles on politics as well. | ||
| Jaimec |
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/view/2009/Q4/view598 .html | ||
| Fast2win |
There is no Buell tech. in the HD line. A sportster uses it's own system developed by HD. ESPFI. Which is what they have been using on all there bike's. AS obvious as it may seem(that HD would just adapt Buell fi) Buell use's DDFI II. and harley use's their own system. I can't see any tech. other than the shared XL component's that also benefited HD. If it was'nt for Buell's need for more power and better reliability, HD would not have developed the XL to it''s current level. Shit it took them till 2004 that any of that tech. even made in to a sportster. and even then not all of it now in 2009 they finally give it to you in a XR1200. Harley reps would tell me that the extra power and tq. curve was'nt what a traditional HD rider want's. Thats bullshit. Who does'nt want free hp. | ||
| Homer007 |
Not sure where all this “technology” licensing/patent talk is going. From reading this thread, one would think that Buell was an innovation wonder house with far out ideas that the other companies would be dying to use. I think this is very far from the truth. Off the top of my head, I can list about three things that separated Buell from the big four jap companies and the few Italian manufacturers. 1. The belt system. While low maintenance is a major plus, when Buell used chain drives for their race bikes, they admitted that for high power applications, nothing beats a chain. 2. Fuel in frame. The jap manufacturers can fit the gas tank and a big airbox without fuel in frame so I’m not sure if there are any advantages to fuel in frame. I’ve only experienced the fuel in frame disadvantages of fuel boiling/expansion/dripping and annoying (maybe dangerous) gas fumes. 3. Perimeter brakes. Again, while this is different, I do not see any advantages to this braking system. Most bikes I’ve ridden stopped just as well, if not better with the traditional twin disc systems. Some of you had mentioned FI, but I am not sure what is innovative or patentable about Buell’s FI system except how poor it ran at low rpms. The fuel surging issue is laughable when you consider what they were trying to sell the bikes for pre Oct 15. How can you expect to compete with the big four when the fueling on my neighbor’s 1o year old carbureted EX500 was better than the 2009 CR I bought? While I do applaud Buell for thinking outside the box, I would argue that their “innovations” are of little value to their competitors and more likely will be interesting footnotes in motorcycle history. Just because it is different does not mean it’s better.. | ||
| Iamarchangel |
Thanks for that piece off the top of your head. Hope the rest is doing okay. Probably should sell that thing to some sucker who wants it and doesn't know any better, don't you think? What were you thinking when you bought that anyway? I mean, look at all the bikes with chain drives, fuel tanks, regular disk brakes and different FI systems. Did the salespeople have a paper bag over the bike and make you buy it? | ||
| 4cammer |
2. Fuel in frame. The jap manufacturers can fit the gas tank and a big airbox without fuel in frame so I’m not sure if there are any advantages to fuel in frame. I’ve only experienced the fuel in frame disadvantages of fuel boiling/expansion/dripping and annoying (maybe dangerous) gas fumes. Seeing more and more w/the tank under or partially under the seat. Hmmmm. Why? | ||
| Midknyte |
1. The belt system. While low maintenance is a major plus, when Buell used chain drives for their race bikes, they admitted that for high power applications, nothing beats a chain. Nothing beats a chain for swapping gear ratios. That has as much or more to do with it... | ||
| Midknyte |
Perimeter brakes. Again, while this is different, I do not see any advantages to this braking system. It's not as much about the braking system as the weight savings [read unsprung weight] of the lighter wheel that the system allows for because braking forces do not need to be transmitted thru thicker, heavier spokes... | ||
| Homer007 |
I was thinking it was a hell of a bike for the price I paid for it. Is it worth the original $12,000 asking price? Absolutely not... | ||
| Sparky |
H7, you don't seem to have any appreciation for the unique engineering that helps make your bike comparable to the competition. Too bad you don't understand: -- how the principles of Mass Centralization, Chassis Rigidity and Low Unsprung Weight work together to produce the Firebolt being proclaimed in one international magazine as the "World's Best Handling Motorcycle", -- how quiet and maintenance-free belt drive systems on street bikes are compared to chain-drives, -- why big-bore twins require a much larger airbox than comparable IL4's to make power, -- that otherwise wasted space in frame spars can also be made to carry fuel. Too bad you don't get it. That's OK, others do, especially those who paid full price. | ||
| Rocketman |
Homer, I think you found out much like I did some years earlier that the Buell products are somewhat floored in their efforts to bring unique designs to the motorcycle market. I've thought for many years since my own problems started occurring all to frequently throughout my S1W that many things about the machine were a compromise on quality to keep the costs at a level other Buell designs could be brought to the fore. Imagine if Buell had stood alone instead of seeking mass production under the protection of Harleys wings, instead going for much smaller production numbers bringing higher quality Buells to market for a higher price. A higher price that gave much better value for money than paying through the nose to be a sort of man in the street development rider stroke guinea pig for the next generation of Buell. I said from the off the 1125 would be a failure outside of America. One because of its styling, and two because of some of its cheap quality components. I was not wrong. What surprised me was how many Americans have expressed disappointment with them too. Refreshing to see someone speak out as you have during such fraught for Buell times. Rocket | ||
| Rocketman |
Hi Sparky. It was 'fastest cornering bike' if you're referring to 'Bike' magazine.  Rocket | ||
| Homer007 |
I’ve never understood why some people have blind loyalty to a product they’ve bought. Maybe it makes them feel justified or smarter in their purchase. I’ve always looked at anything I’ve bought with an objective point of view. I’ve bought pieces of crap vehicles in past and I’ve bought some great ones also. While I absolutely love the CR AT THE PRICE I bought it at, I’m not going to ignore its design issues or existing flaws just because it was relatively cheap. | ||
| Doughnut |
}Why was HD so angry Lack of fiber?  | ||
| Steve_a |
As for the belts versus chain argument: Belts are more efficient, lighter overall, require no adjustments, are quieter, and last longer than a chain. Under very extreme shock loads, they are not as rugged as a chain, and they don't like to ingest stones or certain high viscosity muds or the rubber balls from road racing tires over the course of a 24-hour race. They are also considerably more expensive to put on a motorcycle than a chain, which is the main reason you don't see them used more widely, as well as the fact that you have to design the bike from the beginning for the larger sprockets required with a belt. Belts are still being improved fairly rapidly, as evidenced by the upgrades to belts over the years in the Buell product line. The main reason Buell Racing ran chains instead of belts was the difficulty of offering a wide range of gear ratios affordably with the Buell belt system as currently designed. (Message edited by steve_a on November 29, 2009) | ||
| Iamarchangel |
I’ve never understood why some people have blind loyalty to a product they’ve bought. Maybe it makes them feel justified or smarter in their purchase. Oh, I get it now. You're going to keep this bike, with all the flaws that you never noticed before the sale, so you can get your jollies criticizing the designers and engineers. Carry on, then. | ||
| Court |
>>>>I’m not going to ignore its design issues or existing flaws just because it was relatively cheap. I don't overlook things like a power steering pump going out in an $80,000 car with 500 miles either. If it's mechanical it's going to break sometime. I also agree with you on the blind loyalty thing . . . I've owned LOTS of motorcycles. As recently as 2 years ago, I had 5 brands in my garage at one time . . time has increased my affinity for Buells mostly because of the folks and the body of knowledge available. Try getting help with your Gold Wing or R1 frame cracks. Badweb is a great source of information. I'm really happy with both the Buells I own now and I was happy with the one I bought for $15,000 in 1990. Like a dishwasher, dog, pickup truck or guitar . . mostly a matter of personal preference. | ||
| Jammin_joules |
sheesh, and friends here try to tell me arguing with some taking the side of dealerships is the most futile position. By the way, orange is the best color no matter what you all may think. Try and prove me wrong.}  | ||
| Eweaver |
Orange can't be the best color. It is a compromise between red and yellow. Everyone knows that compromises are weak, just ask someone who is certain that they are correct. | ||
| Bobbuell1961 |
Court, i have to disagree with you, as far as my dog, what am i going to leave her on the side of the road like a broken down bike? i love my mutt and i love my Buell! |
