| Author | Message | |||
     Fl_a1a |
http://www.sportrider.com/bikes/146_01_honda_nas/photo_10.html | |||
| Tdiddy |
They have under-slung exhaust envy too. | |||
| Thumper2811 |
COPY CATS!  | |||
| Garrett2 |
from what i read buell wasnt first to do wheel mounted brakes and they have under seat exhaust, totally different from under the bike like on buells | |||
| Cupp42 |
Garrett wrote:they have under seat exhaust, totally different from under the bike like on buells Oh? Look at the new Gixxer, under-slung. And the new CBR600RR although the "tailpipe" comes out the tail the bulk of the exhaust is low under the frame and at the back behind the motor. Not so "totally different". | |||
| Swordsman |
Yeah, but Gixxers aren't Honda's, are they?  ~SM | |||
| Cupp42 |
nope, they are not, just a generalization of how the Far East works. | |||
| Jackelfox |
i think the underslung exhuast comment is from the same original concept bike who's exhaust is completely under the bike, much like a buell | |||
| Deadduck |
if we're talking underslung exhaust... you can't forget about the triumph daytona................. eventhough it does exit at the rear............. | |||
| 07xb12scg |
It's pretty funny that some of you are acting like Honda copied Buell. Buell did not invent the perimeter brake. So if Honda is a "copy cat" then so is Buell. | |||
| Spike |
Just in case anyone isn't familiar with the history of the NAS, it was shown to the public back in '01 right around the launch of the XB9R Firebolt. At one point I recall both the NAS and the XB9R both sharing the cover of a magazine, although the NAS concept received a full-page picture while the production XB9R was tucked in the corner. Despite the concept NAS being around for over 6 years now I don't recall ever hearing about a running version, which means you'd probably have an easier time purchasing a Dodge Tomahawk. | |||
| Court |
>>>Buell did not invent the perimeter brake. That is correct. Buell advanced the concept from a novelty cosmetic item to a credible braking system. Many had a rough idea of what the future would look like. . we all knew there had to be a way to make the rotor larger without adding mass . . . . Buell provided the navigation and cognitive transportation to get there. Court | |||
| Tommy_black_shark |
The Japanese have built their motorcycle industry not by innovation, but rather by emulating/perfecting the technology of others. This combined with efficient, high quality mass production has been the story of their success. A list of technology (as opposed to gimmicks) first appearing on Japanese motorcycles would be pretty short. It is interesting to read in the so-called "enthusiast" press that the big thing in Japan now is replicas of the UJM's of the late '70's and '80's. For those too young to remember, these were excellent but uninspiring bikes. Now the moto press (perhaps responding to orders from Tokyo) are singing the praises of these born again UJM's and predicting them as the next big thing here. Maybe, we'll see. Meanwhile, the big four continue to pump out imitation Harley's at a record pace.  | |||
| Ridrx |
07, It's pretty funny that some of you are acting like Honda copied Buell. Buell did not invent the perimeter brake. So if Honda is a "copy cat" then so is Buell. Who did Buell copy? ZTL in a production sport bike NEVER existed before Buell. As stated, the NAS showed up with ZTL around the same time as the original 9R, the difference is Buell's system was in production at that point and Honda was(is) still in the concept stage. Buell didn't invent it...but BUELL DID make it a viable production bike brake system, something NOBODY else has been able(had the cojones) to do. (Message edited by RidrX on July 03, 2007) | |||
| Altima02 |
I heard Buell was the first to have inverted forks on a production motorcycle? Is this true, Court? | |||
| Sparky |
Buell envy is evident in Kawasaki too. To wit the Versys 650 with stainless steel car-like under-engine muffler as seen in the August Cycle World. Erik's Revenge they dub it. It's cool that the article credits Erik and his visionary thinking. | |||
| Djkaplan |
ZTL as a concept existed way before Buell adapted them to motorcycles and patented it. Look at old racing bicycles with ultra light wheels and caliper brakes acting on the rim - the wheels were light because they didn't have to resist torsional loads at the axle (the very lightest wheels had the fewest spokes, btw). The concept was already there, just in a different industry and in much simpler form. Underslung mufflers have also been around for years, but in the past it was purely a packaging issue, not a handling one. Go to the Barber Motorsports museum and you'll see a few bikes built before WWII with underslung mufflers. Although not patented, even the old, underslung, reversed shock arrangement used on the tubers had been produced in many incarnations years before it appeared on a Buell. Not trying to take anything away from these great ideas, but just because something is patented doesn't mean the person who owns the patent invented it, it just means the person or entity who the patent was granted to... patented it. | |||
| Js_buell |
Buell didn't invent it...but BUELL DID make it a viable production bike brake system, something NOBODY else has been able(had the cojones) to do. I'm not saying Buell copied here but I know TM is been using it for a bit on their 530 black dream supermoto bike and it's a production bike. Just not sure for how long they have been using it.  | |||
| Court |
I'm not sure. I was under the impression, based on reading marketing literature and all the cycle magazine in 1990, that they were. Recently we had that discussion and someone had a photo of a 1989 GSXR that had inverted forks. It looked to me like, at least in terms of "model year" the GSXR was perhaps ahead of the Buell. I did some looking, but didn't have the time nor level of curiosity to run down the "photo finish" of the question. Let's leave it as this . . . Buell was either the first or within months of the first. I had, at one time, a list of Buell "firsts". It's a shame that many of them, being more of engineering than commercial interest, don't get the attention I wish they would. My two PERSONAL favorites are the braided brake line (folks had tried and fallen on their asses in the "whip test" . . Buell sorted it out) and the fairing bracket for the 2003 XB. Court | |||
| Court |
Suppose the feds are going to retroactively revoke all of Erik Buell's patents for running around the world copying people. . . . Where is John Britten when we need him?  | |||
| Djkaplan |
Now, come on Court. I'm not taking anything away from Erik. He's an incredibly astute engineer and with a dogged determination... a very good combination. His out-of-the-box solutions are what attracted me in the first place. | |||
| Anonymous |
Patents don't exist without invention, unless they are badly issued, in which case they collapse when challenged in court, and it rarely happens. The details in patents are what separate them from what has been done before. The patents regarding ZTL are what have made it feasible at a reasonable cost. It is absolutely not true to claim Buell has no inventions, but merely gets patents on other's ideas. That is simply not true in any way, and shows ignorance of the details in the patents and of the patent process. | |||
| Court |
I'd never thought of him as a dog, but you may be onto something. And you are spot on with regards to the patents. Patent, in fact all Intellectual Property Law, has become a bit more proactive and prospective. If you look at a number of Buell patents (many by the way not associated with the name Buell) you'll see many that never saw the light of day. You, bear in mind, patent an idea, not a product. There is no model # or SKU associated with a patent. . . that would be Trademark. Of some note, to folks in the motorcycle business, is that, in the same time frame, products liability has also become much more active and proactive. There is, with both IP and PL, a major chasm between what the majority of folks "think" and what the law says. I recently bought a couple books and if you want a good flavor (and love something that reads about as exciting as the Federal Motor Vehicle Code) for the current state of the law, I can reccomend:
We live in a changing world. First, alone, no longer cuts it . . . ya gotta be first AND right. Court There is, with both IP and PL, a major chasm between what the majority of folks "think" and what the law says. Court | |||
| Court |
Okay . . so in the space of a day. . . Buell is a dog AND a copy cat??? Man is he going to be testy this week! | |||
| Spatten1 |
Where is John Britten when we need him? That man made a world class engine in has BACK YARD SHED! He was beyond human. The world was lucky to have him for those few years. RIP. | |||
| Ducxl |
As a committed Buell owner i've got Yamaha/Honda/Suzuki/Ducati ENVY of their leading edge engines'.And they're not even patented! Why can't we evolve a stinking engine! Heck,even Bimota chooses the correct engines' for their leading edge framesets. | |||
| Xbrad9r |
I for one think Erik is the MAN !!!, and I appreciate all the time/work/effort/thinking/trail & error/etc that he and his co-horts put into bike building to get to the point of building my Firebolt. My Buell is the funnest thing i've ever ridden and will be replaced only by another Buell (Uly or a future model ???)...whenever the time is right or the deal is right. I personally believe the small group of men (and women) in East Troy is building the best bikes on the planet, and if you think otherwise, let me show you the roads I like to play on and then see what you think. | |||
| Court |
>>>>The world was lucky to have him for those few years. Right you are. Vickie and I had dinner with his wife several years ago. Fascinating guy. . . and that was a neat engine huh? It always helps me put things in perspective that he, as gifted as he was, never produced a single comercially marketable unit. Please don't take that wrong but rather as a point of reference to truly what it appreciates to get from where John Britten was to where Buell was when the first bike was sold in 1987. It gives a sense of how steep the hill is. Court | |||
| Court |
I spent a day on a Bimota exploring Mt. St. Helens. I'm curious, since Buell sells motorcycles for a living, how many other folks, here on badweb, have ridden more than 100 miles on a Bimota? You get my point . . . neat idea, fun bar talk . . . but Bimota has never been a viable contender beyond the mantel piece market. Please correct me if I am wrong. We're talking about innovation here, not the conglomerating of various parts . . . a discipline in which Bimota clearly exceled. | |||
| Djkaplan |
"It is absolutely not true to claim Buell has no inventions, but merely gets patents on other's ideas." Has anyone said that in this thread anony? "That is simply not true in any way, and shows ignorance of the details in the patents and of the patent process." Sure they don't. But that doesn't change the fact that years before ZTL was patented by Buell, bicycle makers were taking advantage of the same concept. Kudos to Buell for inventing the process and details so it could be applied to motorcycles. I wouldn't be so presumptious as to compare the one patent I was granted (out of the many submitted) to any of Erik Buell's, but I'm certainly not unaware of the details involved for applying for them. |
